Research into stalking victimization has proliferated over the last two decades, but several research questions related to victimization risk remain unanswered. Accordingly, the present study utilized a lifestyle-routine activity theoretical perspective to identify risk factors for victimization. Gender-based theoretical models also were estimated to assess the possible moderating effects of gender on the relationship between lifestyle-routine activity concepts and victimization risk. Based on an analysis of a representative sample of more than 15,000 residents of Canada from the Canadian General Social Survey (GSS), results suggested conditional support for lifestyle-routine activity theory and for the hypothesis that predictors of stalking victimization may be gender based.
BjörklundK.Häkkänen-NyholmH.SheridanL.RobertsK. (2010). The prevalence of stalking among Finnish university students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25, 684-698.
2.
BreidingM. J.SmithS. G.BasileK. C.WaltersM. L.ChenJ.MerrickM. T. (2014, September). Prevalence and characteristics of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence victimization—National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, United States, 2011 (MMWR, Vol. 63, No. SS-8, pp. 1-18). Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
3.
BjerregaardB. (2000). An empirical study of stalking victimization. Violence and Victims, 15, 389-405.
4.
BunchJ.Clay-WarnerJ.LeiM. K. (2015). Demographic characteristics and victimization risk: Testing the mediating effects of routine activities. Crime & Delinquency, 61, 1181-1205. doi:10.1177/0011128712466932
5.
CatalanoS. (2012, September). Stalking victims in the United States—Revised (NCJ 224527). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
6.
ChapmanD. E.SpitzbergB. H. (2003). Are you following me? A study of unwanted relationship pursuit and stalking in Japan: What behaviors are prevalent?Bulletin of Hijiyama University, 10, 89-117.
7.
CohenL. E.FelsonM. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588-608.
8.
CorradoR. R.RoeschR.GlackmanW.EvansJ. L.LegerG. J. (1980). Lifestyles and personal victimization: A test of the model with Canadian survey data. Journal of Crime & Justice, 3, 129-139.
9.
DressingH.GassP.KuehnerC. (2007). What can we learn from the first community-based epidemiological study on stalking in Germany?International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 30, 10-17.
10.
FelsonR. B.BurchfieldK. B. (2004). Alcohol and the risk of physical and sexual assault victimization. Criminology, 42, 837-860.
11.
FineranS.BolenR. M. (2006). Risk factors for peer sexual harassment in schools. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 21, 1169-1190.
12.
FinkelhorD.AsdigianN.L. (1996). Risk factors for youth victimization: Beyond a lifestyle/routine activities theory approach. Violence and Victims, 11, 3-19.
13.
FisherB. S.CullenF. T.TurnerM. G. (2002). Being pursued: Stalking victimization in a national study of college women. Criminology & Public Policy, 1, 257-308.
14.
FoxK. A.GoverA. R.KaukinenC. (2009). The effects of low self-control and childhood maltreatment on stalking victimization among men and women. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 34, 181-197.
15.
FoxK. A.NoblesM. R.FisherB. S. (2011). Method to the madness: An examination of stalking measurements. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 16, 74-84.
16.
FoxK. A.NoblesM. R.FisherB. S. (2016). A multi-theoretical framework to assess gendered stalking victimization: The utility of self-control, social learning, and control balance theories. Justice Quarterly, 33, 319-347. doi:10.1080/07418825.2014.902985
17.
GarofaloJ. (1987). Reassessing the lifestyle model of criminal victimization. In GottfredsonM. R.HirschiT. (Eds.), Positive criminology (pp. 23-42). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
18.
HindelangM. J.GottfredsonM. R.GarofaloJ. (1978). Victims of personal crime: An empirical foundation for a theory of personal victimization. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing.
19.
KennedyL. W.FordeD. R. (1990). Routine activities and crime: An analysis of victimization in Canada. Criminology, 28, 137-152.
20.
MessnerS. F.LuZ.ZhangL.LiuJ. (2007). Risks of criminal victimization in contemporary urban China: An application of lifestyle/routine activities theory. Justice Quarterly, 24, 496-522.
21.
MilliganS. (2011). Criminal harassment in Canada, 2009. Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics. Available from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/
22.
MustaineE. E.TewksburyR. (1998). Victimization risks at leisure: A gender-specific analysis. Violence and Victims, 13, 231-249.
23.
MustaineE. E.TewksburyR. (1999). A routine activity theory explanation for women’s stalking victimizations. Violence Against Women, 5, 43-62.
24.
NavarroJ. N.JasinskiJ. L. (2013). Why girls? Using routine activities theory to predict cyberbullying experiences between girls and boys. Women & Criminal Justice, 23, 286-303.
25.
NgoF. T.PaternosterR. (2013). Stalking, gender, and coping strategies: A partial test of Broidy and Agnew’s gender/general strain theory hypotheses. Victims & Offenders, 8, 94-117.
26.
NoblesM. R.FoxK. A. (2013). Assessing stalking behaviors in a control balance theory framework. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 40, 737-762.
27.
NoblesM. R.FoxK. A.PiqueroN. L.PiqueroA. R. (2009). Career dimensions of stalking victimization and perpetration. Justice Quarterly, 26, 476-503.
28.
NoblesM. R.ReynsB. W.FoxK. A.FisherB. S. (2014). Protection against pursuit: A conceptual and empirical comparison of cyberstalking and stalking victimization among a national sample. Justice Quarterly, 31, 986-1014.
29.
PaternosterR.BrameR.MazerolleP.PiqueroA. (1998). Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology, 36, 859-866.
30.
PoppA. M.PegueroA. A. (2011). Routine activities and victimization at school: The significance of gender. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 2413-2436.
31.
PurcellR.PathéM.MullenP. E. (2002). The prevalence and nature of stalking in the Australian community. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 36, 114-120.
32.
PyroozD. C.DeckerS. H.MouleR. K. (2013). Criminal and routine activities in online settings: Gangs, offenders, and the Internet. Justice Quarterly. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/07418825.2013.778326
33.
ReynsB. W. (2013). Online routines and identity theft victimization: Further expanding routine activity theory beyond direct-contact offenses. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 50, 216-238.
34.
ReynsB. W.EnglebrechtC. M. (2010). The stalking victim’s decision to contact the police: A test of Gottfredson and Gottfredson’s theory of criminal justice decision making. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 998-1005.
35.
ReynsB. W.HensonB.FisherB. S. (2011). Being pursued online: Applying cyberlifestyle-routine activities theory to cyberstalking victimization. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38, 1149-1169.
36.
StahuraJ.SloanJ.III (1998). Urban stratification of places, routine activities, and suburban crime rates. Social Forces, 66, 1102-1118.
TillyerM. S.WilcoxP.GialopsosB. M. (2010). Adolescent school-based sexual victimization: Exploring the role of opportunity in a gender-specific multilevel analysis. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 1071-1081.
39.
TjadenP.ThoennesN. (1998). Stalking in America: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey. Washington DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
40.
TseloniA.WittebroodK.FarrellG.PeaseK. (2004). Burglary victimization in England and Wales, the United States and the Netherlands: A cross-national comparative test of routine activities and lifestyle theories. The British Journal of Criminology, 44, 66-91.
41.
Van Der AaS.KunstM. (2009). The prevalence of stalking in The Netherlands. International Review of Victimology, 16, 35-50.
42.
Van WilsemJ. (2011). Worlds tied together? Online and non-domestic routine activities and their impact on digital and traditional threat victimization. European Journal of Criminology, 8, 115-127.
43.
WilcoxP.FisherB. S.LaskyN. V. (2015). Gendered opportunity and victimization. In CullenF. T.WilcoxP.LuxC. L.Lero JonsonC. (Eds.), Sisters in crime revisited: Bringing gender into criminology (pp. 189-208). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
44.
WilcoxP.TillyerM. S.FisherB. S. (2009). Gendered opportunity? School-based adolescent victimization. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 46, 245-269.
