Individual and Structural Opportunities

• Date: 01 December 2014
• DOI: 10.1177/1057567714557155
• Published date: 01 December 2014
• Author: Rachel E. Stein
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article
International Criminal Justice Review
2014, Vol. 24(4) 392-409
Individual and Structural
ª 2014 Georgia State University
Reprints and permission:
Opportunities: A Cross-
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1057567714557155
icj.sagepub.com
National Assessment of
Females’ Physical and Sexual
Assault Victimization
Rachel E. Stein1
Abstract
Opportunity theories are suited to cross-national research on victimization that incorporates a mul-
tilevel approach. Comparative research on non-lethal victimization often combines several types of
violence into a single category of expressive crime. While expressive crimes do indeed share some
characteristics, opportunities leading to specific types of victimization may vary. The current
research uses the International Crime Victimization Survey (ICVS) to examine two types of expres-
sive victimization: sexual and physical assault. These data are limited to female victims, as sexual
assault in the ICVS is assessed only for females. These data provide a rich source of comparative
information on opportunities leading to victimization. Opportunities have been traditionally exam-
ined at the individual level through routine activities and lifestyles theories. Opportunity at the struc-
tural level of analysis is less commonly employed; however, routine activities theory offers a
framework for measuring structural opportunity. The results indicate a multilevel approach of
opportunities on victimization is appropriate. Differences in opportunity leading to sexual and phys-
ical assault are most evident in the opportunities provided by the development level of the country.
The impact of country development on physical assault victimization is moderated by the involve-
ment in leisure activities outside of the home.
Keywords
routine activities theory, cross-national victimization, expressive crime, multilevel analysis
Violent crimes impact people across the globe and generate a host of problems, including phys-
ical injury and psychological trauma (Bouten, Goudriaan, & Nieuwbeerta, 2002). Much of the the-
oretical work in criminology focuses on why people commit violent crimes. Fewer theories
1 Department of Sociology and Anthropology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA
Corresponding Author:
Rachel E. Stein, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, West Virginia University, PO Box 6326, Morgantown, WV
26506, USA.
Email: rachel.stein@mail.wvu.edu

---

Stein
393
concentrate on the victims of these crimes. Theories of opportunity, including routine activities the-
ory and lifestyles theory, explore the situations that lead to victimization (Cohen & Felson, 1979;
Hindelang, Gottfredson, & Garofalo, 1978). Opportunities are central to understanding victimization
and crime; in fact, crime cannot occur without the opportunity to commit the act (Wilcox, Land, &
Hunt, 2003).
To understand victimization in a cross-national scope, it is useful to examine not only the
individual-level opportunities for victimization but also the opportunities created by country struc-
ture (Uludag, Colvin, Hussey, & Eng, 2009). Much of the cross-national research on victimization
focuses on either the individual level or the structural level of analysis (Anderson & Bennett, 1996;
Bennett, 1991; Tseloni, Wittebrood, Farrell, & Pease, 2004; van Wilsem, 2004). Fewer studies
incorporate a multilevel analysis within an opportunities theoretical framework (Stein, 2010; Tse-
loni & Farrell, 2002; van Wilsem, de Graff, & Wittebrood, 2003). The research on the individual
and structural levels of analysis is often limited by the lack of consistency in how opportunities and
victimization are operationalized.
The International Crime Victimization Survey (ICVS) includes information on the demographic
characteristics and non-lethal forms of victimization from respondents in over 60 countries. The
ICVS is a rich source of data that was created specifically to conduct cross-national comparisons
of crime victimization (Howard, Newman, & Pridemore, 2000). Neapolitan (2003) indicates the
ICVS is an alternative to official crime data that are more comparable on the cross-national scope.
Self-report data are not compromised by the different rules guiding official data across countries.
Studies that use the ICVS to examine violent victimization often incorporate several types of vio-
lence in a single category (Cruszczynska, 2002; Van Wilsem, 2004; Van Wilsem et al., 2003). These
studies assume that opportunities leading to expressive crimes are similar (Felson, 1998) and do not
address how opportunities might vary according to specific types of violence. The ICVS data allow
for the comparison of physical and sexual assault, to determine the unique opportunities leading to
types of expressive victimization. The goal of the current research is to examine how individual and
structural opportunities differ across types of violent crime. The research extends current cross-
national literature on sexual and physical assaults against women. More specifically, the current
study incorporates 45 developed and developing countries in a multilevel assessment of
opportunities.
Individual-Level Theories of Opportunity
There are many theories of crime and victimization, most of which focus on the behaviors of
offenders. Routine activities theory, in conjunction with lifestyles theory, was developed to explain
the opportunities leading to victimization (Cohen & Felson, 1979; Hindelang et al., 1978). The the-
ories were developed in the post–World War II era, in efforts to explain why victimization rates were
rising in the United States. Cohen and Felson (1979) proposed that the increase in crime was due to
the change in people’s daily routines to activities outside of the home. The opportunities that lead to
crime include the individuals’ behaviors and the context in which people are situated (Wilcox et al.,
2003). The routine activities approach is ideal to examine how multilevel opportunities impact the
risk of victimization.
Opportunities for victimization at the individual level of analysis are centered on the daily rou-
tines and lifestyles of a person (Cohen, Klugel, & Land, 1981). Routine activities theory proposes
the convergence of a motivated offender and a suitable target in the same time and space, with
an absence of capable guardians presents a situation ideal for victimization (Cohen & Felson,
1979). Moreover, the demographic characteristics of people help to determine their lifestyles
through role expectations, providing certain freedoms and constraints of everyday behaviors (Hin-
delang et al., 1978). Young males, for example, are more likely than older females to traverse public

---

394
International Criminal Justice Review 24(4)
spaces alone, making them ideal candidates for victimization. Activities that draw people away from
their home into the public sphere are associated with a higher risk of victimization, as there is an
increased possibility for offenders and victims to converge in the same time and space (Cohen &
Felson, 1979; Hindelang et al., 1978).
Empirical research indicates that people who go to bars regularly, are employed, or are
enrolled in school are at an increased risk of violent victimization (Arnold, Keane, & Baron,
2005; Kennedy & Forde, 1990; Miethe & Meier, 1994; Stein, 2010; van Wilsem et al.,
2003). People who have low levels of self-control are also more likely to engage in risky beha-
viors, which can include frequenting bars on a regular basis. These individuals are exposed to
more opportunities in which offenders and targets can converge, and therefore, are at a higher
risk of victimization (Pratt, Turanovic, Fox, & Wright, 2014). Schreck and Fisher (2004) find
that demographic proxies of lifestyles also influence the risk of violent victimization. Younger
people in particular are likely to experience personal crime victimization, as their lifestyles are
represented by unstructured activities away from the home (Sacco, Johnson, & Arnold, 1993;
Sampson & Wooldredge, 1987; Uludag et al., 2009).
There is a component of rationality within each opportunity for victimization. Rationality high-
lights the need to distinguish between instrumental (property) and expressive (violent) crimes, as the
situations leading to victimization vary across types of crime (Bennett, 1991; Clarke & Cornish,
1985; Cohen et al., 1981; Cornish & Clarke, 1986; Kennedy & Forde, 1990). Instrumental crimes
clearly involve a rational choice by the offender—the tangible gain of money or property outweighs
the risk of getting caught (Clarke & Cornish, 1985; Felson, 1998). Expressive crimes can also be
classified as rational acts; however, the outcomes are not likely represented by physical or material
gain. Felson (1998) indicates the goal of expressive crimes is to gain or maintain a favorable self-
image through violent actions. The target suitability element of routine activities theory also impacts
rational choice. If an offender believes he can overpower the victim without difficulty, he is more
likely to act out in violence. An offender who gains status and avoids punishment is likely to take
advantage of the opportunity for violent crime (Clarke & Cornish, 1985; Cornish & Clarke, 1986;
Felson, 1996; Outlaw, 2001).
In many large-scale and cross-national studies, violent victimization is defined as a broad cate-
gory that includes several types of victimization (Arnold et al., 2005; Cruszczynska, 2002; Miethe,
Stafford, & Long, 1987; Uludag et al., 2009; van Wilsem, 2004; van Wilsem et al.,...