Running head: REACTIONS TO CRIME IN ITALY
Psychological Reactions to Crime in Italy: 2002-2004
Piero Amerio and Michele Roccato University of Torino
NB In stampa sul Journal of Community Psychology, 6, 2006.
Authors note
Piero Amerio, Department of Psychology, University of Torino, Via Verdi 10, 10124 Torino, Italy. Tel. ++390116702060, Fax ++390116702061, E-mail
amerio@psych.unito.it
Michele Roccato, Department of Psychology, University of Torino, Via Verdi 10, 10124 Torino, Italy. Tel. ++390116702015, Fax ++390116702061, E-mail
roccato@psych.unito.it
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Michele Roccato, Department of Psychology, University of Torino, Via Verdi, 10, 10124 Torino, Italy. Telephone: ++390116702015, Fax: ++390116702061, E-mail: roccato@psych.unito.it
Abstract
We performed a secondary analysis of the data collected by the Observatory of the North-West (mail panel representative of the Italian population over 18), describing the trends in the distribution of fear of crime (FC) and of concern about crime as a social problem (CC) in Italy between the end of 2002 and the beginning of 2004. After analyzing the main sociodemographic characteristics of the people who became more afraid and more concerned, we built two models for predicting such trends using three sets of independent variables, concerning: (a) the sociodemographic and victimization domains, (b) the psychosocial and political domains, and (c) the mass media domain. Main results were as follows: (a) even though correlated, FC and CC showed different distributions, since CC was less widespread than FC; (b) during the period in question, the spread of FC became broader, while that of CC was reduced; (c) in order to predict the trend in FC during the period in question, sociodemographic and victimization variables were sufficient; and (d) to predict the trend in CC it was useful to use psychosocial and mass media variables also. Implications, limitations, and future research directions are discussed.
Key words: Fear of crime, Social concerns, Feeling of insecurity, Victimization, Mass media, Prejudice
In the last thirty years, the term “insecurity” has become very broadly used in contemporary language, passing from the specialized lexicons of technology and economic affairs and entering the mass media vocabulary. It has also become a broadly used category in sociology and one of the fundamental axes of political discourse (Amerio, 2004). During the same period, numerous attempts were made at studying insecurity from a psychosocial point of view. These studies viewed insecurity as a fluid but persistent state which constitutes a confluence of perceptions, evaluations,
sensations, emotions, and concerns emerging in the relationship between the individual and his/her material, social and symbolic environment. (e.g. Amerio & Roccato, 2004; Van der Wurff, Van Staalduinen, & Stringer, 1989; Zani, Cicognani, & Albanesi, 2001).
In effect, insecurity seems to have become one of the most critical problems of our time (Amerio, 1999). It is of importance in the lives of individuals, both on account of its possible psychological consequences (anxiety, distrust, disempowerment,
dissatisfaction) and with regard to the behaviors used to cope with it (reduction of social activities, constraints imposed on one’s own life, leaving certain areas of the city and moving to others considered safer, purchase of burglar alarms, etc.) (Barbagli, 1998; Liska, Sanchirico, & Reed, 1988; Skogan & Maxfield, 1981). But insecurity is also of importance in collective life. On the one hand, it is affected, at least in part, by the objective economic, social and political conditions of the communities. On the other hand, it can in turn affect community life, favoring the reduction of cohesion and solidarity or promoting the exclusion or delegitimization of outgroups, to the point of promoting a “security ideology” which can transform the legitimate desire to live in safe communities into a legitimization of extremely violent racist or xenophobic behaviors (Jeudy, 1986; Pitch, 2001).
The feeling of insecurity has been operationalized especially in terms of psychological reactions to crime. According to Rountree (1998, see also Rountree & Land, 1996), psychological reactions to crime have a cognitive dimension (the
perceived risk of victimization) and an affective dimension (fear of crime). According to Winkel (1998), it is necessary to distinguish between the subjective risk of
victimization and the perceived negative impact associated with victimization. Finally, according to Furstenberg (1971) and Roché (1993), there are two principal
psychological reactions to crime. The first is fear of crime (hereinafter: “FC”), which is agitation or anxiety for one’s own security or that of one’s personal property. FC is not experienced only in the actual moment of danger, but also as a reaction to a danger which is only potential, generated by the anticipation (which may not be realistic) of possibly being victimized. FC is consistently operationalized with reference to the life space of the interviewed (home, block, neighborhood, quarter, city) and not to his/her country in its entirety (e.g. Lane & Meeker, 2003; Roché, 1993; Rountree & Land, 1996; Perkins & Taylor, 1996; Warr, 1995; Warr & Stafford, 1983). The second--which shows weak correlations with the first--is concern about crime as a social problem (hereinafter: “CC”). This is a feeling of anxiety which does not directly concern oneself, but rather the security and well-being of the community in its entirety (Nardi, 2003). CC has been operationalized by means of questions which are constructed in abstract form or are referred to the country in which the interviewed live, rather than to his/her life space (e.g. Diamanti & Bordignon, 2001; Nardi, 2003; Roché, 2003).
According to literature, FC is higher: (a) among women (only when fear of rape is not controlled for) (Ferraro, 1995); (b) among youths (Lane & Meeker, 2003; Warr, 1995) and/or senior citizens (Amerio & Roccato, 2005); (c) among low-status
individuals (Kanan & Pruitt, 2002; Pantazis, 2000; Rohe & Burby, 1988); (d) among urban dwellers (Kuo, Bacaicoa, & Sullivan, 1998; Miceli, Roccato, & Rosato, 2004; Perkins, Wandersman, Rich, & Taylor, 1993); (e) among people who have been victimized (Rosenbaum & Heath, 1990; Tulloch, 2000), especially if these persons are not capable to effectively cope with the material and emotional consequences of the victimization (Moos, 2002) and if in the FC and the victimization assessment the measurement error is minimized (Bilsky & Wetzels, 1997). Other factors exerting a positive effect on FC are the objective spread of micro-criminal behaviors (Miceli, Roccato, & Rosato, 2004; Moser, 1992; Rountree, 1998) and the objective spread of physical (graffiti spraying, dirt, and damage to private and public property) and social (small acts of vandalism, loitering by teenager groups, prostitution, verbal violence, and homeless people) incivilities (Hermand, Siméone, & Delbarre, 1997; LaGrange,
Ferraro, & Supancic, 1992; Robinson, Lawton, Taylor, & Perkins, 2003; Roché, 2002; Sampson & Raudendush, 1999).
The study of predictors of CC has been much less in-depth than that concerning the predictors of FC. The literature, in fact, does little more than claim that CC depends less on victimization than on the individual’s value system and world outlook (Amerio, Gattino, & Roccato, 2004; Nardi, 2003), and is particularly influenced by the mass media (Heath & Petraitis, 1987).
In a previous study (Amerio & Roccato, 2005) we analyzed the distribution of FC and CC in Italy in 2002, also attempting to build a model predicting FC and CC using three sets of variables. The first--which we defined as traditional, given that it is the one most frequently used in the literature--included sociodemographic and victimization variables. The second included a number of psychosocial and political variables.
Finally, the third included a number of mass media variables. Our data showed that CC was much more widespread than FC (persons identified as very or quite afraid totaled 43.2%, whereas persons identified as very or quite concerned totaled 96.5%), and that the association between the two constructs was significant but weak, rho = .23, p < . 001. The best predictors of FC were victimization (direct and indirect) and some sociodemographic variables (the size of the city of residence, being out of the labor market and residing in the most socially disadvantaged areas of Italy). In any event, two psychosocial variables (distrust of others and ethnic prejudice) also had an effect on FC. In order to predict CC it was found necessary to use mass media variables (frequency of exposure to TV news), as well as psychosocial and political variables (distrust of others and of Italians, ethnic prejudice and political disempowerment), whereas
sociodemographic variables and victimization did not influence this construct.
Goals
This study had two goals. The first one was to study trends in the distribution of FC and CC in Italy between the end of 2002 and the beginning of 2004; the second one was to try to identify the variables predicting the increase or reduction of FC and CC in Italy in that period.
Method
We performed a secondary analysis of the data collected in October 2002 (N = 3,262) and in January 2004 (N = 4,992) by the Observatory of the North-West, a research institution of the University of Torino. The Observatory, three times a year, conducts a mail survey on a representative panel of the Italian population, longitudinally
interviewed in order to study a number of issues concerning culture, politics, economy and society. Using such data, we initially calculated the distribution of FC and CC in Italy in January 2004, comparing it to that of October 2002. In order to work on generalizable data, in such analyses we separately analyzed the data collected in October 2002 and those collected in January 2004. We then analyzed the association between FC and CC in the 2004 file.
In a second step, after merging the two files, we compared the people that, between October 2002 and January 2004, became more afraid of crime and more concerned about crime to the people whose FC and CC remained unchanged or became weaker. Merging the two files allowed us to fully take advantage of the longitudinal nature of our data. However, due to panel attrition we lost a number of participants (N of the merged file = 1,688). Moreover, the data slightly lost in generalizability, since--as shown in Table 1--people who participated in both surveys were slightly different from the general population. Our merged sample, compared to the Italian population, was slightly more educated, urbanized, afraid of crime and concerned for crime as a social problem. However, no relevant sex and age differenced emerged. Moreover, the differences in FC and CC were really small.
Finally, working on the merged file, we attempted to predict the trends in FC and CC between October 2002 and January 2004. We used as independent variables three sets of variables: (a) traditional (sociodemographic and victimization) variables, (b) psychosocial and political variables, and (c) mass media variables. We assessed the trend in FC during the period in question subtracting the variable “FC in 2002” from the variable “FC in 2004”. We did the same with regard to the assessment of the trend in CC during the period in question.
In order to choose the model most suited to predicting the trends in FC and CC in Italy between the end of 2002 and the beginning of 2004, we built 14 stepwise multiple regression models. Of these, seven were aimed at predicting trend in FC between 2002 and 2004, and seven at predicting trend in CC during the same period. In order to select the most efficient models for predicting our dependent variables, we compared the predictive power of the traditional model, the psychosocial and political model, the mass media model and combinations thereof. The models selected were those
characterized by the best balance between fit (assessed by adjusted r2) and parsimony
(assessed by counting the number of independent variables which exerted a significant influence on FC or CC). Once the most satisfactory models were selected, we tried to identify the predictors of the changes in FC and CC in Italy during the period in question.
Data Set
The variables we used, for the most part, were the same as we had used in our previous study (Amerio & Roccato, 2005). With regard to psychological reactions to crime, we used the following questions: “Think of micro-criminality. How would you define the situation regarding this problem in your city of residence?” and “Think of micro-criminality. How would you define the situation regarding this problem in Italy?”. As Amerio & Roccato (2005), given that the first item refers to criminality in the life space of the people interviewed and the second refers to criminality throughout Italy, we considered them as operationalizations of FC and of CC respectively.
With regard to sociodemographic and victimization variables, we used sex, age, years of formal education, type of work (belonging to the self-employed lower middle
class, the wage-earning lower middle class, the working class, the category of students, the category of housewives or retired persons; in the regressions, we used belonging to the middle class as reference category), number of family members, area of residence (northwestern Italy, northeastern Italy, and southern Italy or the Italian islands; in the regressions, we used residence in central Italy as reference category), the size of the city of residence, direct victimization and indirect victimization (victimization of a family member, a relative, a friend or an acquaintance) in the three years preceding the first survey. In fact, the victimization variables were assessed in October 2002, but not in January 2004. Accordingly, when we’ll speak of victimization, we’ll refer to
victimization between 1999 and 2002.
With regard to psychosocial and political variables, we used satisfaction with one’s own life, ethnic prejudice, forecast of the trend in the Italian economy in the 12 months after the survey, forecast of the trend in one’s own economic situation in the six months after the survey, perception of the trend in one’s own economic situation in the 12 months preceding the survey, trust in other people, trust in Italians, political
disempowerment and placement on the right-left political axis. Ethnic prejudice was assessed by summing the answers to four items such as “Most irregular immigrants commit criminal activities” and “Immigrants living in Italy contribute to the cultural enrichment of our country” ( = .67). Political disempowerment was assessed by summing the answers to six Likert items such as “People like me have no influence on government policies” and “Sometimes politics seem so complicated that I do not understand what is going on” ( = .86). The other psychosocial variables were assessed by means of single items.
Two mass media variables were used: frequency of reading the daily newspapers and frequency of exposure to TV news. Relative to our previous study (Amerio & Roccato, 2005), in this research we did not use variables relative to the number of minutes of exposure to the various TV networks, given that, had we included them, as a result of the high number of missing values present in them, the number of participants would have drastically dropped from 1688 to 1078.
Results
Trends in the Fear of Crime and Concern about Crime as a Social Problem
Tables 2 and 3 respectively show the trends in FC and CC between October 2002 and January 2004. As shown in Table 2, in January 2004 Italians who were not at all or only slightly afraid of crime in their city of residence continued to constitute the
absolute majority. Nonetheless, during the period in question, FC increased as a whole. In fact, the number of persons very or quite afraid increased by 5.8%. This increase was due exclusively to the increase in the number of persons quite afraid, whereas the number of persons very afraid decreased slightly. Table 3 shows that, in January 2004, Italians who were very or quite concerned by crime as a social problem continued to represent the overwhelming majority--a percentage close to 95%. Nonetheless, during the period under analysis, the overall spread of CC in Italy become a little smaller (- 2.7%). The number of Italians very concerned by crime as a social problem especially diminished. In the 2004 data, although distributed differently, FC and CC showed a significant association, rho = .30, p < .001.
Table 4 shows a sociodemographic comparison between the people who become more afraid of crime and/or more concerned about crime as a social problem between
October 2002 and January 2004 and the general population. Compared to the general population: (a) people whose FC scores became higher were more frequently women, older and, above all, urbanized, while no relevant age difference arose; and (b) people whose CC scores became higher were more frequently men, older, less educated and less urbanized. Such descriptive results confirmed the main results one can find in the first, bivariate studies about the psychological reactions to crime (especially those about fear of crime). However, in our opinion a multivariate approach would be much fruitful in analyzing the relations between our predictors on the one hand and FC and CC on the other hand. In the next paragraphs we report the analyses we performed using such approach.
Predictors of the Trend in Fear of Crime
Table 5 shows that in order to predict the change in FC between October 2002 and January 2004 the most efficient model was the traditional one. That model, in fact, enabled prediction of 11.2% of the variance of the dependent variable using eight independent variables. There were three other models (traditional + psychosocial and political, traditional + mass media, and full model) whose fit was better than that of the traditional model. These models, however, used such a large number of independent variables as to make the relationship between fit and parsimony less favorable.
Table 6 shows that seven variables exerted a positive influence on the trend in FC. Of these: (a) three--living in a large urban center, living in southern Italy or the Italian Islands, and living in northwestern Italy (rather than living in central Italy)--concerned one’s place of residence; (b) two--being out of the labor market or belonging to the self-employed lower middle class (rather than belonging to the middle
class)--concerned one’s profession; (c) two--having been directly or indirectly victimized in the three years which preceded October 2002--concerned victimization. Finally, only a single variable—age—exerted a negative influence on the trend in FC from 2002 to 2004.
Predictors of the Trend in Concern about Crime as a Social Problem
Table 7 shows that the best model for predicting the trend in CC in Italy between 2002 and 2004 integrated the variables of the traditional model, those of the
psychosocial and political model, and those of the mass media model. This model enabled prediction of 12.2% of the variance of our dependent variable, using 10
independent variables. Table 8 shows that the trend in CC was positively influenced by some traditional variables (belonging to the self-employed lower middle class or being a retired person or a housewife, rather than belonging to the middle class), some
psychosocial and political variables (political disempowerment, ethnic prejudice, right-wing political placement, distrust of Italians, perception of one’s own economic situation as improving), and some mass media variables (frequency of exposure to TV news). The only variable exerting a negative effect on such trend was the size of the city of residence. On the other hand, the variables assessing victimization had no effect on CC.
Discussion
In this study we examined the trends in distribution of fear of crime (FC) and concern about crime as a social problem (CC) in Italy between October 2002 and
January 2004. Some results can be compared to those obtained in other research; other results are genuinely innovative.
With regard to the results which are comparable to those published in the literature, we confirmed the principal discovery made by Furstenberg (1971) and Roché (1993): FC and CC must be considered as two distinct constructs. In fact, FC and CC were distributed in considerably different patterns. Both in 2002 and in 2003 Italians were very concerned about the situation of crime in their country, but were not very afraid about the situation of crime in their city of residence. However, between the end of 2002 and the beginning of 2004 the differences between the distribution of FC and CC slightly decreased, given that the spread of FC increased, whereas that of CC decreased. Moreover, the correlation between the two became slightly higher (from rho = .23, p < . 001 to rho = .30, p .001).
The most innovative part of our study enabled us to ascertain the principal predictors of the individual changes in FC and CC between the end of 2002 and the beginning of 2004. Our data showed that the three variables most useful in predicting the increase in FC were living in a large city and having been directly or indirectly victimized between 1999 and 2002. It is very interesting to note that, in our previous study, such variables were also found to be the three variables most useful in predicting the absolute individual level of FC (Amerio & Roccato, 2005). However, their ranking was different: In our first study, the most important variables were those of
victimization (direct and indirect). In this study, the most important variable was the urbanization of the area of residence. With regard to the latter variable, we showed that, all in all, living in an urban area does not only favor FC, but also tends to increase it in the course of time. Our data did not enable us to know whether this broader spread of
FC in urban areas depends on a difference in the objective distribution rates of crime between urban and extra-urban areas. However, it is plausible that this may depend, at least in part, on the greater rates of incivility present in urban areas relative to out-of-town areas (Sartori, 2003).
We believe that the discovery of the effect exerted by victimization in the past on the change in successive levels of FC constitutes the most interesting result of our work. Such result, in fact, showed that not all of the effects of victimization (direct and indirect) on FC are immediate: Victimization continues to exert an influence on
individual levels of FC for years after the fact. Thus, victimization represents an episode which is rather difficult to process from the emotional standpoint. The conclusion to be drawn from this is that, for the sake of the victims of acts of micro-criminality and of the communities in which they live, it would be worthwhile to provide psychological support helping the victimized persons to cope with the material and emotive
consequences resulting from the acts of victimization.
With regard to prediction of the individual changes in CC, four out of the ten variables pinpointed also had an effect on the absolute level of CC in the study by Amerio and Roccato (2005). These were political disempowerment, ethnic prejudice, distrust in Italians and frequency of news watching. As set forth above, both at the absolute level and with regard to the trend in CC in the course of time, we found confirmation that what affects CC is not victimization, but rather, on the one hand, the variables reflecting the values of the individual and his/her ways of representing and evaluating his/her social environment, and, on the other hand, exposure to mass media.
What stated above concerns the variables we used. The use of the data collected by the Observatory of the North-West involved two advantages. On the one hand, when
analyzing the trends in FC and CC, we were able to obtain, within a brief period of time, very high-quality data which could be generalized to the entire Italian population. On the other hand, in view of the fact that the sample used consisted of a panel, we were able to longitudinally analyze the trends in FC and CC over time, on the same
participants, thus canceling the effects of sample fluctuation. These two advantages are not all that often to be found in psychosocial research.
However, the most innovative part of our work had a relevant limit: The sample originated by the merging of the files of the data collected in October 2002 and January 2004 was not completely representative. Nonetheless, the differences between the Italian population and such sample were not dramatic. In our opinion, the results of our regressions can be cautiously generalized.
Our analysis lacked at least two individual variables of considerable importance, i.e. those measuring direct and indirect victimization which occurred between 2002 and 2004. We hope that, in future, we will be able to analyze the trends in FC and CC in Italy by comparing the effects of victimization in the past with those of victimization which took place during the period under research. In addition, the importance of the effects of victimization on FC in the course of time prompts us to inquire into the types of victimization which have the greatest effect on FC. Miceli, Roccato, and Rosato (2004) noted that, at least in Italy, burglary in one’s home has a much bigger impact on FC than pocket-picking and bag-snatching. It would also be quite interesting to analyze victimization with reference to other acts of micro-criminality.
Another important development of this study may consist of the attempt to predict both the absolute value of FC and CC in Italy and their trends over the course of time, by combining, together with the individual variables which we used in this study, four
more variables. The first two--the objective rate of criminality and the objective rate of physical and social incivility in the participants’ area of residence--may well be used to predict the trend in FC. Nonetheless, the assessment of this second variable would be almost impossible if the intention was to interview a representative sample of Italians. It might be worthwhile, then, to measure it in ad hoc studies performed on specific communities. The third and the fourth variables which it would be interesting to insert into our model may well be useful for predicting variations in CC. Such variables are the content of the messages in the mass media (newspapers and TV) to which the participants are exposed and the way in which people watch TV or read the papers. We believe that the analysis of this last variable could definitely be worthwhile, since the consumers of the mass media are information processors who actively process the messages which they receive, re-constructing the meaning thereof (Amerio, 1991; Kinder & Sears, 1985; Lau & Sears, 1986). These mass media-related variables as well are quite difficult to measure in studies performed on samples taken from the general population. Nonetheless, we believe that their use could improve the efficiency of our model.
References
Amerio, P. (1991). Perspectives theoriques cognitives et sociales en psychologie politique [Cognitive and social theoretical perspectives in political psychology]. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 4, 209-229.
Amerio, P. (1999). Il senso della sicurezza [The feeling of security]. Milano: Unicopli. Amerio, P. (2004). Problemi umani in comunità di massa Human problems in mass
communities. Torino: Einaudi.
Amerio, P., Gattino, S., & Roccato, M. (2004). Insécurité et représentation du domaine politique Insecurity and representation of the political world. Psychologie et société, 7, 89-114.
Amerio, P., & Roccato, M. (2004). Structure multifacettée du sentiment d’insécurité [Multifaceted structure of the feeling of insecurity]. Psychologie et société, 7, 47-70.
Amerio, P., & Roccato, M. (2005). A predictive model for psychological reactions to crime in Italy: An analysis of fear of crime and concern about crime as a social problem. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 15, 17-28. Barbagli, M. (1998). Reati, vittime, insicurezza dei cittadini [Crimes, victims, and
citizen insecurity]. Roma: Istat.
Bilsky, W., & Wetzels, P. (1997). On the relationship between criminal victimization and fear of crime. Psychology, Crime and Law, 3, 309-318.
Diamanti, I., & Bordignon, F. (2001). Sicurezza e opinione pubblica in Italia [Security and public opinion in Italy]. Rassegna Italiana di Sociologia, 42, 115-133. Ferraro, K. F. (1995). Fear of crime: Interpreting victimization risk. New York: State
Furstenberg, F. (1971). Public reactions to crime in the streets. American Scholar, 40, 601-610.
Heath, L., & Petraitis, J. (1987). Television viewing and fear of crime: Where is the mean world? Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 8, 97-123.
Hermand, D., Siméone, A., & Delbarre, C. (1997). Désordre urbain et sécurité résidentielle perçue Urban disorder and perceived residential security. Psychologie Française, 42, 113-122.
Jeudy, H.-P. (1986). Les enjeux de l’insécurité Stakes of insecurity. Informations sociales, 6, 6-11.
Kanan, J. W., & Pruitt, M. V. (2002). Modeling fear of crime and perceived
victimization risk: The (in)significance of neighborhood integration. Sociological Inquiry, 72, 527-548.
Kinder, D. R., & Sears, D. O. (1985). Public opinion and political action. In G. Lindzay, & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (pp. 659-741). New York: Random House.
Kuo, F. E, Bacaicoa, M., & Sullivan, W. C. (1998). Transforming inner-city landscapes: Trees, sense of security, and preference. Environment and Behavior, 30, 28-59. LaGrange, R. L., Ferraro, K. F., & Supancic, M. (1992). Perceived risk and fear of
crime: Role of social and physical incivilities. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 29, 311-334.
Lane, J., & Meeker, J. W. (2003). Ethnicity, information sources, and fear of crime. Deviant Berhavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 24, 1-26.
Liska, A. E., Sanchirico, A., & Reed M. D. (1988). Fear of crime and constrained behavior specifying and estimating a reciprocal effects model. Social Forces, 66, 827-837.
Miceli, R., Roccato, M., & Rosato, R. (2004). Fear of crime in Italy: Spread and determinants. Environment and Behavior, 36, 776-789.
Moos, R. (2002). The mistery of human context and coping: An unravelling of clues. Americal Journal of Community Psychology, 30, 67-88.
Moser, G. (1992). Les stress urbains Urban stresses. Paris: Armand Colin.
Nardi, L. (2003). Il senso di insicurezza [The feeling of insecurity]. In M. Barbagli (Ed.), Rapporto sulla criminalità in Italia [Report on criminality in Italy] (pp. 525-554). Bologna: Il Mulino.
Pantazis, C. (2000). “Fear of crime”, vulnerability and poverty. British Journal of Criminology, 40, 414-436.
Perkins, D. D., Wandersman, A. H., Rich, R. C., & Taylor, R. B. (1993). The physical environment of street crime: Defensible space, territoriality and incivilities. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 13, 29-49.
Pitch, T. (2001). Sono possibili politiche democratiche per la sicurezza? Is it possible to promote security by democratic policies? Rassegna Italiana di Sociologia, 42, 137-157.
Robinson, J. B., Lawton, B. A., Taylor, R. B., & Perkins, D. D. (2003). Multilevel longitudinal impacts of incivilities: Fear of crime, expected security, and block satisfaction. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 19, 237-274.
Roché, S. (1993). Le sentiment d’insécurité The feeling of insecurity. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Roché, S. (2002). Tolerance zéro? Incivilités et insécurités [Zero tolerance? Incivilities and insecurities]. Paris: Odile Jacob.
Rohe, W. M., & Burby, R. J. (1988). Fear of crime in public housing. Environment and Behavior, 20, 700-720.
Rosenbaum, D. P., & Heath, L. (1990). The “psycho-logic” of fear reduction and crime-prevention programs. In J. Edwards, R. S. Tindale, L. Heath, & J. Posavac (Eds), Social influence and prevention (pp. 221-247). New York: Plenum Press. Rountree, P. W. (1998). A re-examination of the crime-fear linkage. Journal of
Research in Crime and Delinquency, 35, 341-372.
Rountree, P. W., & Land, K. C. (1996). Perceived risk versus fear of crime: Empirical evidence of conceptually distinct reactions in survey data. Social Forces, 74, 1353-1376.
Sampson, R. J., & Raudendush, S. W. (1999). Systematic social observation of public spaces: A new look at disorder in urban neighborhoods. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 603-651.
Sartori, L. (2003). Degrado e paura per la criminalità [Physical incivilities and fear of crime]. In M. Barbagli (Ed.), Rapporto sulla criminalità in Italia [Report on criminality in Italy] (pp. 489-524). Bologna: Il Mulino.
Skogan, W., & Maxfield, M. (1981). Coping with crime. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Tulloch, M. (2000). The meaning of age differences in the fear of crime. British Journal
of Criminology, 40, 451-467.
Van der Wurff, A., Van Staalduinen, L., & Stringer, P. (1989). Fear of crime in
residential environments: Testing a social psychological model. Journal of Social Psychology, 129, 141-160.
Warr, M. (1995). Public opinion on crime and punishment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 59, 296-310.
Warr, M., & Stafford, M. (1981). Fear of victimization: A look at the proximate causes. Social Forces, 61, 1033-1043.
Winkel, F. W. (1998). Fear of crime and criminal victimization. British Journal of Criminology, 38, 473-484.
Zani, B., Cicognani, E., & Albanesi, C. (2001). Adolescents’ sense of community and feeling of insecurity in the urban environment. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 11, 475-489.
Tables
Table 1.
Differences between the Italian Population and the Sample of Our Merged File
Italian population Merged file
Women 52.2% 52.5%
Mean age 50.0 years 50.8 years
Years of formal education 9.2 years 10.2 years
People living in large towns (≥ 100,000 inhabitants) 23.9% 27.0%
Quite or very afraid of crime 49.0% 50.2%
Table 2.
Trend in Fear of Crime Distribution in Italy: 2002-2004
2002 2004 Trend 2002-2004
Not at all afraid 10.2% 8.5% - 1.7%
Little afraid 46.5% 42.5% - 4.0%
Quite afraid 29.8% 37.0% + 7.2%
Table 3.
Trend in Concern about Crime as a Social Problem Distribution in Italy: 2002-2004
2002 2004 Trend 2002-2004
Not at all concerned 0.4% 0.6% + 0.2%
Little concerned 3.2% 5.6% + 2.4%
Quite concerned 51.6% 51.0% - 0.6%
Table 4.
Comparison between the People whose FC and/or CC Score become Higher between October 2002 and January 2004 and the General Population
All participants People whose FC score became higher
People whose CC score became
higher
Women 52.5% 55.2% 50.9%
Mean age 50.8 years 52.1 years 52.8 years
Years of formal education 10.2 years 10.4 years 9.2 years People living in large towns
(≥ 100,000 inhabitants)
Table 5.
PREDICTION OFTHE TREND IN FEAR OF CRIME: 2002-2004. FIT AND
PARSIMONY OF THE TESTED MODELS
Adjusted R2 Number of independent variables in the equation Mean efficiency of independent variables Traditional model .112 8 1.40
Psychosocial and political model
.037 5 0.74
Mass-media model .005 1 0.50
Traditional + psychosocial and political model
.142 17 0.84
Traditional + mass media model
115 9 1.28
Psychosocial and political + mass media model
.050 8 0.63
Traditional + psychosocial and political + mass media model
.147 19 0.77
Note. The “Mean efficiency of independent variables” column reports the result of the operation (fit / parsimony)*100, where fit = adjusted r2 of the model and parsimony =
Table 6.
Predictors of the Trend in Fear of Crime: 2002-2004
Independent variable B E.S. Beta
Size of area of residence .670*** .051 .265
Direct victimization .515*** .081 .156
Indirect victimization .373*** .060 .151
Residence in Southern Italy or Italian Islands .365*** .062 .138 Residence in Northwestern Italy .268*** .057 .113
Retirees-housewives .228*** .070 .096
Self-employed lower-middle class .445** .144 .062
Age -.001*** .002 -.154
Constant -.411***
Table 7.
Prediction of the Trend in Concern about Crime as a Social Problem: 2002-2004. Fit and Parsimony of the Tested Models
Adjusted R2 Number of independent variables in the equation Mean efficiency of independent variables Traditional model .053 9 0.59
Psychosocial and political model
.085 7 1.21
Mass-media model .008 2 0.40
Traditional + psychosocial and political model
.120 13 0.92
Traditional + mass media model
.055 10 0.55
Psychosocial and political + mass media model
.093 8 1.16
Traditional + psychosocial and political + mass media model
.122 10 1.22
Note. The “Mean efficiency of independent variables” column reports the result of the operation (fit / parsimony)*100, where fit = adjusted r2 of the model and parsimony =
Table 8.
Predictors of the Trend in Concern about Crime as a Social Problem: 2002-2004
Independent variable B S.E. Beta
Political disempowerment .005*** .005 .218
Ethnic prejudice .036*** .008 .111
Self-employed lower middle class .504*** .109 .107
Retirees-housewives .163*** .042 .097
Students-unemployed .204*** .053 .096
Right-wing political placement .002* .008 .063
Distrust in Italians .010* .042 .054
Perception of one’s own economic situation as improving .090* .040 .052
Frequency of TV news watching .186* .086 .049
Size of area of residence -.184*** .040 -.105
Constant .642*** .142
