So far I have argued that in its attempt to explain victimisation by an examination of those held to be victims, and in its particular concentration on the notion of victim-types, on victims of inter-personal crime and on those who contribute to their own victimisation, positivist victimology has faced profound theoretical and operational difficulties which have inevitably limited its explanatory potential. What it has signally failed to do is to explain the everyday social process of identifying and responding to victimising events. The second part of this article examines the central role which this process performs in social life, and proceeds to analyse the parameters and the consequences of that process.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AgnewR. (1985). Neutralising the impact of crime. Criminal Justice and Behaviour, 12, 221–239.
2.
AhmedS. (1979). Visibility of the victim. Journal of Social Psychology, 107, 253–255.
3.
BerkowitzL. (1962). The stimulus qualities of the scapegoat. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 64, 293–301.
4.
BidermanA. (1967). Report on a Pilot Study in the District of Columbia on Victimisation and Attitudes towards Law Enforcement. (President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice, Field Survey I). Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
5.
BoyceM. (1982). How to be a victim. Transactional Analysis Journal, 12, 249–251.
6.
BrockT.BussA. (1962). Dissonance, aggressions and the evaluation of pain. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65, 197–202.
7.
BurkeK. (1954). Permanence and Change. Hermes Publications: California.
8.
BurtM. (1983). A conceptual framework forvictimological research. Victimology, 8, 261–269.
9.
CialdiniR. (1976). Victim derogation in the Lerner paradigm: just world or just justification?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 719–724.
10.
ClarkR. (1974). Where is the apathetic bystander? Situational characteristics of the emergency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, 279–287.
11.
DavisK.JonesE. (1960). Changes in interpersonal perception as a means of reducing cognitive dissonance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 61, 402–410.
12.
deCarufelA. (1981). Victims’ satisfaction with compensation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 11, 445–459.
13.
DownesD.RockP. (1982, 2nd ed.) Understanding deviance. Oxford University Press; England.
14.
DuncanH. (1968). Symbols in society. Oxford University Press: England.
15.
FarringtonD.KnightB. (1979). Two non-reactive field experiments on stealing from a ‘lost’ letter. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 18, 277–284.
16.
FattahE. (1976). The use of the victim as an agent of self-legitimisation. In Victims and society (VianoE., ed.) pp. 105–
129. Visage Press; Washington D.C.
17.
FerraroK.JohnsonJ. (1983). How women experience battering — the process of victimisation. Social Problems. 30, 325–339.
18.
GaertnerS. (1975). The role of racial attitudes in helping behaviours. Journal of Social Psychology, 97, 95–101.
19.
GlassD. (1964). Changes in liking as a means of reducing cognitive discrepancies. Journal of Personality, 32, 540–549.
20.
GulottaG.de CabaldoL. (1983). A systemic and attributional approach to victimology. Victimology, 8, 5–16.
21.
HarrisM.BaudinH. (1973). The language of altruism: the effects of language, dress and ethnic group. Journal of Social Psychology, 91, 37–41.
22.
HowardJ. (1984). The ‘normal’ victim: the effects of gender stereotypes on reactions to victims. Social Psychology Quarterly, 47, 270–281.
23.
HustonT. (1981). Bystander intervention into crime. Social Psychology Quarterly, 44, 14–23.
KatzI. (1973). Ambivalence, guilt and the scapegoating of minority group victims. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9, 423–436.
26.
KatzI. (1979). Harm doing and the victim's racial or orthopedic stigma as determinants of helping behaviour. Journal of Personality, 47, 340–364.
27.
KraheB. (1988). Victim and observer characteristics as determinants of responsibility attributions to victims of rape. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 50–58.
28.
LernerM. (1970). The desire for justice and reactions to victims. In Altruism and helping behaviour (MacauleyJ.BerkowitzL., eds.) pp. 205–229. Academic Press; New York.
29.
LernerM. (1980). The belief in a just world. Plenum Press; New York.
30.
McBarnettD. (1983). Victims in the witness-box: confronting victimology’s stereotype. Contemporary Crises, 7, 293–303.
31.
MacaulayS.WalsterE. (1971). Legal structures and restoring equity. Journal of Social issues, 27, 173–188.
32.
MawbyR. (1985). Bystander responses to the victims of crime: is the Good samaritan alive and well?Victimology, 10, 461–475.
33.
MawbyR.BrownJ. (1984). Newspaper images of the victim: a British study. Victimology, 9, 82–94.
34.
MeindlJ.LernerM. (1983). The heroic motive. Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 19, 1–20.
35.
MiersD. (1980). Victim compensation as a labelling process. Victimology, 5, 3–16.
36.
MillerF. (1976). Predicting perceptions of victimisation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 6, 352–359.
37.
PetersonC.SeligmanM. (1983). Learned helplessness. Journal of Social issues, 39, 103–116.
38.
PodmoreD.YeomansK. (1977). Honesty and size and type of victim organisation. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 18, 293–298.
39.
QuinneyR. (1972). Who is the victim?Criminology, 10, 314–323.
40.
SchurE. (1965). Crimes without victims. Prentice Hall; New Jersey.
41.
ScottR. (1969). The making of blind men. Russell Sage; New York.
42.
ShotlandR.GoodsteinL. (1984). The role of the bystander in crime control. Journal of Social Issues, 40, 9–26.
43.
SkolnickJ.DombrinkJ. (1978). The legalisation of deviance. Criminology, 16, 193–208.
44.
SmigelE. (1956). Public attitudes towards stealing as related to the size of the victim organisation. American Sociological Review, 21, 320–327.
45.
StewartJ.RosenS. (1975). Adequacy of compensation, worthiness of recipient and their effects on transgressor compliance to render aid. Journal of Social Psychology, 97, 77–82.
46.
SudnowD. (1965). Normal crimes: sociological features of the penal code. Social Problems, 12, 255–276.
47.
SykesG.MatzaD. (1957). Techniques of neutralisation: a theory of delinquency. American Sociological Review, 22, 664–670.
48.
SymondsM. (1975). Victims of violence: psychological effects and after-effects. American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 35, 19–26.
49.
ThorntonB. (1984). Defensive attribution of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 721–734.
50.
VianoE. (1983). Violence, victimisation and social change: a socio-cultural and public policy analysis. Victimology, 8, 54–79.
51.
WalsterE. (1978). Equity theory and research. Allyn and Bacon; Boston, Mass.
52.
WalsterE.BerscheidE. (1967). When does a harm-doer compensate a victim?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 435–441.
53.
WalsterE.PiliavinJ. (1972). Equity and the innocent bystander. Journal of Social Behaviour, 28, 165–189.
54.
WatsonD. (1976). Some conceptual issues in the social identification of victims and offenders. In Victims and society (VianoE., ed.) pp. 60–71. Visage Press; Washington D.C.
WilliamsJ. (1984). Secondary victimisation: confronting public attitudes about rape. Victimology, 9, 66–81.
57.
WilliamsS. (1984). Left-right ideological differences in blaming victims. Political Psychology, 5, 573–581.
58.
YarmeyD. (1985). Older and younger adults’ attribution of responsibility towards rape victims and rapists. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 17, 327–338.
59.
ZiegenhagenE. (1978). Victims, Crime and Social Control. Praeger; New York.
