FAMILY MATTERS: EFFECTS OF FAMILY MEMBERS’ RESIDENTIAL AREAS ON CRIME LOCATION CHOICE*

• Author: MARRE LAMMERS,WIM BERNASCO,STIJN RUITER,BARBARA MENTING
• Published date: 01 August 2016
• Date: 01 August 2016
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12109

FAMILY MATTERS: EFFECTS OF FAMILY MEMBERS’

RESIDENTIAL AREAS ON CRIME LOCATION

CHOICE∗

BARBARA MENTING,1MARRE LAMMERS,1STIJN RUITER,1,2

and WIM BERNASCO1,3

1Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR)

2Department of Sociology, Utrecht University

3Department of Spatial Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

KEYWORDS: crime location choice, awareness space, residential areas of family mem-

bers, discrete spatial choice modeling

According to crime pattern theory, offenders are likely to select crime locations

within their awareness space. Previous studies have shown that offenders often commit

crimes within their current and former residential areas and in areas they previously

targeted. However, offenders’ awareness spaces obviously consist of more locations

that potentially influence their crime location choices. This study examines the impor-

tance of the residential areas of offenders’ family members. Most offenders visit their

families at least occasionally and consequently get familiar with the areas in which their

families live. It is hypothesized that family members’ residential areas are at increased

risk of being targeted. Unique data were used to reconstruct residential histories of the

parents, siblings, and children of 7,910 offenders who committed 19,420 offenses. The

results of discrete spatial choice models showed that residential areas of family mem-

bers are indeed at increased risk of being targeted. Current familial residential areas

had stronger and more consistent effects than had former familial residential areas.

Effects were strongest for the residential areas of offenders’ children compared with

those of their parents and siblings. The residential areas of male and female family

members affected the crime location choices of male and female offenders equally.

The importance of family in the etiology of crime is undisputed. However, family may

not only influence whether people commit crime but also where they do. According to

crime pattern theory (Brantingham and Brantingham, 1993, 2008), offenders usually com-

mit crimes in areas where the presence of attractive targets overlaps with their awareness

space. Because most people visit their family members rather frequently, and because

∗We thank Astrid Patty and Peter Versteegh of the The Hague Police Service for providing crime

and offender data. We also thank Zo¨

e Driessen for her help with the data cleaning, as well as

Editor-in-Chief Wayne Osgood and the anonymous reviewers for their helpful feedback. The re-

search leading to this study received funding from the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Re-

search under the Innovational Research Incentives Scheme Vidi [452–12–004].

Direct correspondence to Barbara Menting, Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law

Enforcement, De Boelelaan 1077a, 1081 HV Amsterdam, the Netherlands (email: BMenting@

nscr.nl)

C2016 American Society of Criminology doi: 10.1111/1745-9125.12109

CRIMINOLOGY Volume 54 Number 3 413–433 2016 413

414 MENTING ET AL.

places visited frequently are key elements of awareness space, the residential areas of of-

fenders’ family members should have an increased risk of being targeted. However, no

previous empirical crime location choice studies have focused explicitly on the effects of

residential areas of family members of offenders; only the importance of current or for-

mer residential areas of the offenders themselves (e.g., Bernasco, 2010) and their previous

crime locations have been shown (Bernasco, Johnson, and Ruiter, 2015; Lammers et al.,

2015).

This study is the first to examine how the residential areas of their family members af-

fect the crime location choices of offenders. Although these areas have not been empha-

sized as an activity node in original accounts of crime pattern theory, they are probably

part of (many) offenders’ awareness spaces if offenders visit their families. However, their

importance for crime location choices has not yet been assessed empirically. This study

combines police data on 7,910 offenders in the greater The Hague area in the Netherlands

and the 19,420 offenses they committed with unique and detailed data to reconstruct the

residential histories of their parents, siblings, and children. These data allow us to real-

ize three aims. First, we test the influence of both current and former residential areas of

any of the close family members (parents, siblings, or children) of offenders. Second, we

assess whether crime location choices are differently affected by the current and former

residential areas of parents, siblings, and children. Third, we contribute to existing liter-

ature by examining whether the crime location choices of male and female offenders are

differentially affected by the residential areas of their male and female family members.

In subsequent sections, crime pattern theory is explained in more detail, followed by

arguments to support the expectation that residential areas of family members are part of

offenders’ awareness spaces and, thus, influence their crime location choices. The possible

moderating role of the gender of both the offender and his or her family members is sub-

sequently described. After specifying the hypotheses of this study, the data and methods

used are described, and the results are presented. This article concludes with a discussion

of the findings and their implications for theory and future research.

CRIME PATTERN THEORY: THEORY AND

EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE

According to crime pattern theory, offenders are more likely to target areas within

their awareness space because they are familiar with these areas and consequently have

some knowledge about the potential risks and rewards involved. All people, including

offenders, learn about their environment during their routine activities. Places where a

significant amount of time is spent are called “activity nodes.” Examples are the home,

work location, school, and shopping areas. These nodes and the travel routes between

them form an individual’s activity space, and an individual’s awareness space consists of

this activity space and all places within visual range (Brantingham and Brantingham, 1981,

1993, 2008). Because most individuals visit their family members at least occasionally, the

residential areas of these family members are also part of their awareness space. Some

scholars have indeed mentioned the residential areas of others including family mem-

bers as being part of an offender’s activity space (Alston, 1994; Bernasco, 2010; Rossmo,

2000). Furthermore, in geographic offender profiling, family residences can be indicated

as anchor points in addition to the offender’s residential area (Rossmo, 2000).