- Email: [email protected]
Are older people afraid of crime?
ARE OLDER PEOPLE AFRAID OF CRIME? KENNETH I=. FERRARO Northern Illinois University
RANDY L. LaGRANGE University of North Carolina at Wilmington Despite the volume of research on fear of crime among the elderly, the measurement procedures most frequently used are of questionable validity because of theoretical and methodological shortcomings. A conceptualframework for analyzing perceptions of crime ispresentedto avoid the empirical pitfalls in much fear-of-crime research Two recent articlespublished in thegerontological literature on fear of crime are critically reviewed to illustrate the nature of the problem and to demonstrate that policy recommendations regarding fear of crime among the elderly may be seriously misdirected, given the type of research that has been conducted. Suggestions for improving research on this subject are offered so that programmatic and policy decisions may be soundly developed. ABSTRACT:
Social gerontologists have extensively examined fear of crime among the elderly-its causes and consequences, its prevalence and distribution. They also have shaped social policy through reports to funding agencies and publications in professional journals. As a recent review by Ferraro and LaGrange (1987) indicates, over twenty scholarly publications have appeared within the last two decades ostensibly examining fear of crime among the elderly (Braungart, Braungart, and Hoyer 1980; Clarke and Lewis 1982; Clemente and Kleiman 1976; Cutler 1980; Janson and Ryder 1983; Jaycox 1978; Jeffords 1983; Kennedy and Silverman 1985; Lawton and Yaffe 1980; Lebowitz 1975; Lee 1982a, 1982b; Lindquist and Duke 1982; Miethe and Lee 1984; Mullen and Donnermeyer 1985; Norton and Courlander 1982; Pollack and Patterson 1980; Skogan and Maxfield 1981; Sundeen and Mathieu 1976; Warr 1984; Wiltz 1982; Yin 1980, 1982). Despite the volume of research that has been generated, what we know about fear of crime among the elderly is increasingly being questioned. This is indicated in part by contradictory statements and inconsistent research findings over just how fearful the Directall correspondenceto: KennethE Ferraro, Departmentof Sociologyand Gerontology em Illinois University, DeKalb,IL 601 IS. JOURNAL OF AGING STUDIES, Volume 2, Number 3, pages 277-287. Copyright @ 1988 by JAI Press, Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. ISSN: 0890-4065.
Program, North-
278
JOURNAL OF AGING STUDIES
Vol. ~/NO. 311988
elderly really are. The dominant-and popularized-view holds that the elderly are exceptionally fearful, far more than other age groups, and far beyond their actual risk of being victimized (Jaycox 1978; Lindquist and Duke 1982). As a result, it is held that many elderly have isolated themselves from the outside world, live a life of selfimposed confinement, and are captives in their own homes (Braungart, Hoyer, and Braungart 1979; Clemente and Kleiman 1976; Time 1976, 1985). As Warr (1984, p. 68 1) observes, “It is by now perfunctory to begin an article on fear of victimization with dramatic statements about the prevalence of fear in the United States, or with Iurid stories about elderly citizens barricaded in their homes.” Along with Warr, others have questioned findings regarding the relationship between age and fear of crime (LaGrange and Ferraro 1987; Jeffords 1983; Lawton and Yaffe 1980; Yin 1982). In short, these authors recognize that some older persons may indeed be fearful, but that the problem of fear of crime among the elderly has been exaggerated, p~ncipalIy because of conceptual cloudiness and operational obfuscation of the fear of crime concept. This article further develops the latter view. The authors attempt to illustrate how serious conceptual and measurement problems distort many empirical findings, thereby casting doubt on what we really know about fear of crime. We begin our detailed criticism by examining how others have measured “fear of crime,” focusing on those items contained in national surveys that are widely used. Next, two relatively recent studies are critically analyzed to demonstrate how otherwise sound empirical research contributes to the confusion, We have chosen these particular studies for three reasons: (1) they are representative of the problem; (2) they appeared in a leading gerontological journal known for its influence, especially among policy makers and practitioners; and (3) they are not based on national samples, as is the case with so many other studies. This point implies that researchers are still initiating studies with dubious measures of fear of crime, not just analyzing secondary data sources with questionable procedures. Our critique is not limited to the gerontological literature. It includes much of the sociological and criminological literature on fear of crime as well. Ultimately it is our hope to challenge readers to reconsider policy recommendations derived from much of the existing literature. Policies derived from this literature may be misguided, given the type of research that has been conducted. We further suggest that a new wave of research is necessary to improve our understanding of fear of crime.
The Measurement of Fear of Crime Little systematic attention has been devoted to the question of how best to measure fear of crime. In fact, there is considerable confusion over what “fear of crime” really is. DuBow, McCabe, and Kaplan (1979) and Yin (1980) have found definitions of fear of crime to be noticeably lacking in the literature,’ and Garofalo and Laub (1978, p. 246) assert that “what has been measured in research as the ‘fear of crime’ is simply not fear of crime.” The term “fear of crime” is now casually used in the research literature. Warr (1984, p. 68 1) recognized this problem when he relabeled the concept “fear of v~~~~l&l”: “the phrase ‘fear of crime’ has acquired so many divergent meanings in the literature that it is in danger of losing any specificity whatsoever.” Nonetheless, either the message is not getting across to all research audiences, or else it is being ignored.
Are Older People Afraid of Crime?
279
Despite the lack of specificity of the fear of crime concept, there is surprising consistency in the way fear of crime is measured. Although variation exists, the core of the literature centers around two indicators. This is probably due to the widespread access to the two surveys that contain these indicators. The two surveys with the accompanying questions are: (1) National Crime Survey (NW, “How safe do you or would you feel being out alone in your neighborhood at night?“; (2) General Social Survey (GSS), “Is there any area right around here-that is, within a mile-where you would be afraid to walk at night ?” These items are probably familiar to most readers. The second question is the most frequently used measure of fear of crime in the literature (Ferraro and LaGrange 1987). From a strict methodological stance, there are several problems with these measures (or these types of measures): (1) Single-item indicators are generally less desirable than multiple-item indices when measuring complex constructs; (2) The word “crime,” or a specific act that constitutes crime, is not mentioned in either question; (3) Global, single-item indicators are not sensitive to variation in intensity of fear to different crimes; (4) The phrase “do you feel or would you feel” in the NCS question likely has a different meaning to people who regularly go out at night compared to those who do not go out at night; and (5) The common scenario of walking alone at night in both the NCS and GSS questions seems to set up the respondent to reply that he or she would be afraid.2 Because few of us walk alone on the streets at night (because of fear, nowhere to go, nothing to see, etc.), questions of this genre have dubious relevance to our everyday lives, and especially to the everyday lives of the elderly to whom much of this research is directed. There is a more fundamental problem with the standard “fear of crime” measuresmany do not measure fear of crime. To demonstrate this dilemma, we present Figure 1 as a conceptual framework for defining various perceptions about crime. The classification is adapted from DuBow, McCabe, and Kaplan (1979) and includes an example of the type of question for each of the six cells.3 The vertical axis refers to the level of reference of crime perception. These range from the personal (i.e., self-oriented) to the general (i.e., community-oriented). The horizontal axis refers to the type of crime perception and ranges from the cognitive (what we think) to the affective (what we feel). The cognitive dimension on the left end of the continuum encompasses assessments of risk and safety, whereas the affective dimension on the right includes feelings of fear. Finally, different combinations of the level of reference and the type of crime perception in Figure 1 are represented by cells A through F. Note that only cells C and F represent the emotional state of fear (also worry or apprehension) of the respondent; cell C represents fear for others who may be victimized, and cell F represents fear for oneself-what most “fear of crime” researchers assume they are measuring. Cells B and E represent concern about crime (e.g., whether respondent thinks crime is a serious social problem), and cells A and D represent perceived risk of being victimized by crime. The distinction among risks, concerns, and emotions in Figure 1 is not simply a question of semantics (see also Gubrium 1974). The differences are real and profoundly influence empirical results. Furstenberg (197 1) first demonstrated the inappropriateness of mixing measure of crime “concern” with crime “risk” in a reanalysis of survey data from Baltimore. Even more problematic is the tendency to treat measures
280
JOURNAL OF AGING STUDIES
Vol. ~/NO. 311988
FIGURE 1
Classification
and Examples of Crime Perceptions. Type of Perception Affective
Cognitive Level of Reference General
Personal
Judgments A.
Values 6.
L.
Risk to others; crime or safety assessments
Concern about crime to others
Fear for others’ victimization
Do you think that people in this neighborhood are safe inside their homes at night? (Clarke and Lewis 1982)
Choose the single most serious domestic problem (from a list of 10) that you would like to see government do something about. (Furstenberg 1971)
I worry a great deal about the safety of my loved ones from crime and criminals. (Lee 1982a)
D.
E.
F.
Risk to self; safety of self
Concern about crime to self; personal intolerance
Fear for self-victimization
How safe do you feel or would you feel being alone in your neighborhood at night? (Liska et al. 1982)
Are you personally concerned about becoming a victim of crime? (Jaehnig et al. 1981)
How afraid are you of becoming the victim of (76 separate offenses) in your everyday life? (Warr and Stafford 1983)
of crime risk as indicators of crime fear. Consider the familiar question in cell D from Figure 1: “How safe do you feel or would you feel being out alone in your neighborhood at night?” The question asks respondents to assess their perceived level of personal safety based on a particular secenario-being out alone at night. It does not ask respondents if they are (or would be) afraid in this situation. Perceptions of risk and feelings of fear are two distinct reactions to crime. The empirical correlations between global risk and fear measures are not even strong: the absolute value of r ranges from .32 to .48 (Lee 1982a). Many young, black urban males are well aware of their high likelihood of being victimized by crime, but they are not very fearful. The GSS measure “Is there any area right around here-that is, within a milewhere you would be afraid to walk alone at night?” asks respondents how afraid they are rather than how safe they think they are while walking alone at night. Thus, the measure appears to fall within cell F from Figure 1. Unfortunately, the lack of specificity in the overall question, as previously noted, negates its apparent usefulness. We agree with Garofalo and Laub (1978) that this question is more appropriate as a general barometer of the quality of community life than as a meaningful measure of fear of crime.4
281
Are Older People Afraid of Crime?
In short, measurement procedures used by many of the researchers have contributed little to our unde~tanding of fear of crime; the fear of crime concept has multiple meanings and minimal utility. We have gained much insight into perceived risk to crime, especially among the elderly, as well as information on general assessments of the quality of community life. However, while many researchers have measured perceived risks, they assume they have measured fear of crime and interpret their study ~~d~~gs accordingly (Baumer 1985; Kennedy and Silverman 1985; Liska, Lawrence,
and Sanchirico 1982; Taylor, Gottfredson, and Brower 1984). We elaborate on this statement by examining two recent articles that have appeared in a leading and influential gerontological journal. As is shown below, measurement problems confound proper interpretation of study findings.
Two Articles Critiqued A recent paper by Janson and Ryder (1983, p. 207) utilized data from a Los Angeles community survey and reports “a clear relationship between risk of victimization (crime rates) and fear of crime.” By using the geographic divisions of the city of Los Angeles, the investigators examined how Division Crime Rates (DCR) relate to perceptions of crime. Janson and Ryder are to be commended for attempting to examine the relationship between crime risk-“objectively” measured through official crime statistics-and individuals’ perceptions of crime. The following three items were used in forming the index: (1) A question asking respondents what their three greatest problems are. (“Respondents who mentioned crime were coded as 1, otherwise as 0,” Janson and Ryder 1983, p. 209.) (2) A question asking whether living in a high-crime neighborhood is a serious problem with their present housing. (Coded 1 if a problem, 0 otherwise,) (3) A question asking if crime in the streets causes the respondent difficulty in getting around. (Coded 1 if any difficulty, 0 otherwise.) The final index ranges from 0 (crime not a serious problem) to 3 (crime a serious personal problem). Close examination of the indicators used by the authors to measure fear of crime raise serious questions abcut their utility, in terms of both reliability and validity. The authors do not report a reliability estimate for the index, so we do not know how consistently the items relate. The validity of the index is also highly suspect as a measure of fear of crime. It seems that the authors themselves are confused about the meaning of the index, as they usually refer to it as “concern with crime,” but later conclude that they have demonstrated the relationship between DCR and “fear of crime” (1983, p. 211). Using Figure 1 to classify the items used by Janson and Ryder, we suggest that item one is actually a personal value as identi~ed by cell E. Items two and three are probably best characterized as personal judgments-cell D. These items clearly are not measuring fear of crime as identified by cell F. Respondents who are coded “one” on items two and three are not necessarily afraid; they simplyjudge their environment as having some
282
JOURNAL OF AGING STUDIES
Vol. ~/NO. 317 988
crime risks. These respondents may even reorganize their daily lives to avoid being afraid. Since two of the three items in the index are judgments, we interpret their results to suggest that there is a clear relationship between official crime statistics and older adults’ evaluation of risk in their neighborhood. Based on their analysis, it appears that this relationship is stronger for Anglos than for blacks and Mexican Americans. The interpretation of Janson and Ryder’s research may be viewed as related to-and generally confirming-the results of Warr (1982) and others who have studied the accuracy of the public’s estimates of crime. Wan found that there is considerable accuracy of public beliefs about crime. That Janson and Ryder find a stronger relationship between official crime rates and older adults’ judgments of crime among Angles than among blacks or Mexican Ame~cans may be in part due to the consequences of higher educational attainment, such as greater use of the print media. Such hypotheses are certainly tentative due to the mixture ofjudgments and values in their three-item index. In another recent paper titled “Age, Trust, and Perceived Safety from Crime in Rural Areas,” Mullen and Donnermeyer (1985) attempt to focus on perceived safety from crime. Using the Ohio Rural Victim Survey conducted in 1980, they examine the effects of several isolation factors and background variables on trust of neighbors and perceived safety from crime. Their results indicate that perceived trust of neighbors is one of the most important predictors of perceived safety from crime (beta = .3 1). Mullen and Donnermeyer use four measures of perceived safety: (1) How safe do you feel it is for a woman alone at home in your neighborhood during the daylight? (2) How safe do you feel it is for a woman alone at home in your neighborhood during the night? (3) What about a woman walking alone when it is dark-how safe do you feel she is in this neighborhood? (4) What about a woman walking with another adult when it is dark-how safe do you feel they are in this neighborhood? (1985, p. 238). Responses for all of these questions were “very safe,” “somewhat safe,” “unsafe,” and “very unsafe.” The alpha reliability of the index based on the four items is .86. This indicates that the index possesses high reliability. Contrary to previous research, no relationship was found between perceived safety and respondents’ sex. We agree with the authors’ explanation that: “This is probably because of the manner in which perceived safety was measured” (Mullen and Donnermeyer 1985, p. 239X5 Curiously, the authors refer to the typology of DuBow, McCabe, and Kaplan (1979) for classifying perceptions of crime, upon which our Figure 1 is based. They conclude that their index measures an “emotional dimension offeeling that one’s neighborhood is safe from crime with a general rather than a personal basis referent” (1985, p. 238; emphasis added). We agree that they have a general referent. We do not agree, however, that they have measured the “emotional dimension” of a crime perception. In other words, they claim the measure is identified by cell C in our Figure 1, while we feel it is best considered as cell A. Their questions simply ask the respondent to evaluate (judge) the safety of the area for a woman under various conditions. It is quite a different matter to ask a person if he/she is alar for a woman under these varying condi-
Are OlderPeople Afraidof Crime?
283
tions. One is a cognitive assessment, the other is an affective reaction.6 And, as empirical analyses by Lee (1982a) and Warr (1984) demonstrate, indicators of fear of crime and risk of crime are not even highly correlated-for some types of crime they are inversely related. Thus, we would interpret their major results as reflecting the fact that a safer assessment of the neighborhood for women is associated with trust of neighbors. This may be an important finding, as it suggests that the quality of neighborhood cohesion conditions the effect of actual crime rates on judgments of risk of criminal victimization. However, the authors generalize their results far beyond the data they collected and analyzed: “The research findings here indicate that programs dealing with crime and fear of crime in rural areas should give close attention to the role of trust in neighbors” (1985, p. 24 1; emphasis added). We recommend instead that (1) the relationship between perceived safety from crime and fear of crime be empirically established rather than assumed to be opposite, and (2) future research examine the interrelations of the various crime perceptions as identified in Figure 1. Specifically, we challenge researchers to include all of the example questions noted in Figure 1 in social surveys; then one can empirically examine how judgments, values, and emotions are related.
Improving our Knowledge In addition to suggesting the use of a conceptual framework (such as the one identified in Figure 1) to improve our knowledge of fear of crime, we would like to emphasize certain points. First, indicators of fear of crime should measure the emotional state of fear rather than judgments of risk or even general concerns about the crime problem. Second, survey questions should make explicit reference to crime in order to enhance object consistency. General or implied crime referents are not likely to produce valid and reliable variables. To this end, we recommend that researchers differentiate fear in terms of the types of crime (e.g., robbery, murder, consumer fraud). Several studies have used specific victimization and have produced important results (Furstenberg 1971; Lalli and Savitz 1976; Sundeen and Mathieu 1976; Warr 1984; Warr and Stafford 1983). Third, questions intended to measure fear of crime should be stated in nonhypothetical form. Some questions, such as the example for cell D in Figure 1, ask how a person feels or would feel in particularly unusual situations, such as being alone at night anywhere within a mile of their home. It would be better to obtain specific reports about how individuals actually do feel in everyduy situations. Studies by Janson and Ryder (1983) and Warr (1982) suggest that older people are fairly accurate injudging (or estimating) crime risk. However, how afraid they are is still debated. Yin (1982, p. 240) argues that “fear of crime is a less severe problem for the elderly than previous reports suggest.” We feel that there may be some merit in this conclusion after reviewing data from the Harris polls (1975 and 1981), Gallup poll (1982), and the Figgie Report on Fear of Crime (1983; LaGrange and Ferraro 1987). By considering several different perceptions of crime, three major premises can be derived from these data.
284
JOURNAL OF AGING STUDIES
Vol. ~/NO. 3/l 988
The elderly are no more fearful of crime than any other age group. In actuality, data from an ABC News Poll conducted in 1982 show that older people are the least likely of all age groups to worry about certain types of crime. People under 25 years of age are the most likely to worry about car or property vandalism, home burglary, rape, and murder. On the other hand, older people are slightly more likely to worry about street robbery or being injured by a robber or burglar. The relationships between age and worry about these three crimes are curvilinear (J-shaped).7 Assuredly, some older people are very afraid of crime. However, when considering different types of crime, there is no evidence to suggest that older people are more fearful than any other age group (LaGrange and Ferraro 1987).
The public under 65 years of age considers fear of crime a more serious problem for older people than older people consider it for themselves. This fact is easily discerned by comparing self and others referents in the widely used surveys on the Aging (Harris 198 1, p. 10). In 198 1,74% of the public under 65 years of age, compared to 58% of the public 65 and older, reported that fear of crime was a very serious problem for older people. However, when the older adults themselves were asked about their fear of crime, only about one-quarter reported such fear. It appears that the idea of older people being afraid of crime is becoming reified in the public’s mind. Unfortunately, social scientists seem to be biased in this direction as well. Rather than assuming that fear of crime is rampant among elderly Americans, social researchers need to measure fear of crime and examine its relationship to age and other variables.
The more diffuse and vague the measure of “fear of crime,” the more likely that elderly respondents will score high on it. Data from the Figgie Report (1983) indicate that people 60 years and older have substantially lower levels of concrete fear and slightly higher levels of fonniess fear. This finding deserves further investigation; it may be that older people are not actually afraid but more uncertain and anxious about their environment, or genuinely more concerned about the overall quality of life in their neighborhoods (Garofalo and Laub 1978; Gubrium 1974). Could the elderly’s “fear of crime” be part of a larger orientation to their environment? Also, is the public reification of “fear of crime among the elderly” increasing older adults’ formless fear?
CONCLUSIONS In sum, much of the literature on fear of crime among the elderly uses two types of measures. One type examines judgments about the risk of crime as identified by cells A and D in Figure 1. Studies by Warr (1982) and Janson and Ryder (1983) suggest that older people are fairly accurate in judging their probable risk of criminal victimization. The other type of measure uses vague indicators of fear of crime, often without reference to the word crime or any type of crime, and generally beyond the realm of the elderly’s everyday experiences. Many of these measures are difficult to classify according to the framework presented in Figure 1 because of their seeming remoteness to fear of crime. As previously suggested, the bulk of research in the latter type of research
285
Are Older People Afraid of Crime?
is likely to overestimate the prevalence of fear of crime among the elderly. Yin (1982)
is probably correct in asserting that fear of crime among the elderly has been exaggerated. However, until more methodologically sound studies are completedespecially with valid measures of fear of crime-such a conclusion should be regarded as plausible but tentative.
NOTES 1. In a review of the literature Yin (1980) found only one definition: “the amount of anxiety and concern that persons have of becoming a victim” (Sundeen and Mathieu 1976, p. 55). We prefer a more recent definition by Garofalo (198 1, p. 840): “an emotional reaction characterized by a sense of danger and anxiety” as a result of victimization. This often involves a series of complex changes in physiological functioning, especially in the endocrine system (Selye 1956, 1974; Silberman 1981; Stagner 1981). 2. Perhaps a more revealing question would be “who wouldn’t be afraid?” given the dangerous scenario of the question. 3. A thorough discussion of this framework is presented in Ferraro and LaGrange (1987). 4. For an appropriate way to measure fear of crime, consider the method used by Warr and Stafford (1983) that is reported in cell C in Figure 1. (We return to this issue later in the discussion.) However, even the best-designed measures of fear of crime have limitations. The emotional state of a person responding to a questionnaire item about fear of being mugged is quite different than his or her emotional state when actually confronted by a mugger on the street. Garofalo (1981) refers to this as the difference between anti@ated and actual fear. Social surveys of fear of crime are limited to measuring anticipated fear or retrospectively assessing fear. 5. Mullen and Donnermeyer (1985) mention that they wanted to avoid response bias among males who might be reluctant to admit persona1 concerns about safety. 6. Whereas it might be argued that fear of crime is the opposite of a fee&g of safety, the authors inappropriately assume that fear of crime is the opposite of a cognitive assessment (i.e., judgment) of safety as measured in their research. 7. We shift terminology here from “fear” to “worry” because this is the way it is phrased in the ABC News Poll. Whereas the two terms may elicit slightly different connotations (fear being more immediate and acute, worry being more remote and diffuse), both fear and worry are emotional reactions and would fall within cell F (or cell C) in Figure 1.
REFERENCES Baumer, T.L. 1985. “Testing a General Model of Fear of Crime: Data from a National Sample.” Jou~l of Rebecca in Crime and ~e~~~~~ 221239-255. Braungart, M.M., R.G. Braungart, and W.J. Hoyer. 1980. “Age, Sex, and Social Factors in Fear of Crime.” Sociological Focus 1355-56. Braungart, M.M., W.J. Hoyer, and R.G. Braungart. 1979. “Fear of Crime and the Elderly.” In Police and the Elderly, edited by A. P. Goldstein and William J. Hoyer, New York: Pergamon Press. Clarke, AH and M. Lewis. 1982. “Fear of Crime among the Elderly.” ~~~~ Journal of ~~rni~~~~
22~49-62.
Clemente, F. and M. Kieiman. 1976. “Fear of Crime among the Aged.” Gerontologist l&207-2 10. Cutler, S.J. 1980. “Safety on the Streets: Cohort Changes in Fear.” International Journal of Aging and Human Development 10:373-384.
286
JOURNAL OF AGING STUDIES
Vol. ~/NO. 311988
DuBow, F., E. McCabe, and G. Kaplan. 1979. Reactions to Crime: A Criticul Review of the Literature. Washington, DC: National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice; U.S. Gove~ment Printing Office. Ferraro, K.F., and R. LaGrange. 1987. “The Measurement of Fear of Crime.” Sociofogicat btquiry 57:70-101. Figgie Report. 1983. Figgie Report on Fear of Crime: America Afraid. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics: 203. Furstenberg, F.F., Jr. 197 1. “Pubtic Reaction to Crime in the Street.” American Scholar 40~601-610. Gallup, G.H. 1982. 7%~Gallup Report, Number 198. Princeton, NJ: The Gallup Poll. Garofalo, J. 198 1. “The Fear of Crime: Causes and Consequences.” Journal of CriminalLaw and C~rn~~~ 72:839-X57. Garofaio, J. and J. Laub. 1978. “The Fear of Crime: Broadening our Perspective.” Victiology 3:242-253. Gubrium, J.F. 1974. “Victimization in Old Age.” Crime and Delinquency 201245250. Harris, L. and Associates. 1975. 2% its and Read of Aging in America. New York: L. Harris & Associates. 198 1. Aging in the Eighties: America in Transition. New York: L. Harris & Associates. -* Jaehnig, W.B., D.H. Weaver, and F. Fico. 198 1. “Reporting Crime and Fear of Crime in Three Communities.” Jou~l of Commu~a~n 3 1:88-96. Janson, P. and L.K. Ryder. 1983. “Crime and the Elderly: The Relationship Between Risk and Fear.” The Gerontoiogist 23:207-212. Jaycox, V. 1978. “The Elderly’s Fear of Crime: Rational or Irrational.” Victimology 3:329-334. Jeffords, CR. 1983. “The Situational Relationship Between Age and Fear of Crime.” Intemutional Journal of Aging and Human D~e~~~nt 17: 103 - 111. Kennedy, L.W. and H. Krahn. 1984. “Rural-Urban Origin and Fear of Crime: The Case for “Rural Baggage’.” Rural Sociology 49:247-260. Kennedy, L.W. and R.A. Silverman. 1985. “Significant Others and Fear of Crime among the Elderly.” ~nte~~~~ Journal of Aging and Human D~e~~~nt 20~24 l-256. LaGrange, R.L. and K.F. Ferraro. 1987. “The Elderly’s Fear of Crime: A Critical Examination of the Research.” Research on Aging 9:372-39 1. Laili, M. and L. Savitz. 1976. “Fear of Crime in the School Enterprise and Its Consequences.” ~u~a~n and Urban Society 8:40 l-4 16. Lawton, M.P. and S. Yaffe. 1980. “Victimization and Fear of Crime in Elderly Public Housing Tenants.” Journal of Gerontology 35~768-779. Lebowitz, B. 1975. “Age and Fearfulness: Personal and Situational Factors.” Journal of Gerontology 3~696-700. Lee, G.R. 1982a. “Sex Difference in Fear of Crime among Older Peopie.” Research on Aging 4:284-298. _. 1982b. “Residential Location and Fear of Crime among the Elderly.” Rural Socio&y 47:655-669. Lindquist, J.H. and J.M. Duke. 1982. “The Elderly Victim at Risk: Explaining the Fearvictimization Paradox.” Criminology 20:115- 126. Liska, A.E., J. Lawrence, and A. Sanchirico. 1982. “Fear of Crime as a Social Fact.” Social Forces 60:760-770. Miethe, T. and G.R. Lee. 1984. “Fear of Crime among Older People: A Reassessment of the Predictive Power of Crime-related Factors.” Sociorogical Quarterly 25~397-415. Mullen, R.E. and J.F. Donnermeyer. 1985. “Age, Trust, and Perceived Safety from Crime in Rural Areas.” The Gerontologist 25:237-242.
Are Older People Afraid of Crime?
287
Norton, L. and M. Courlander. 1982. “Fear of Crime among the Elderly: The Role of Crime Prevention Programs.” 7’he Gerontologist 22:388-393. Pollack, L. and A.H. Patterson. 1980. “Territoriality and Fear of Crime in Elderly and Nonelderly Homeowners.” Journal of Social Psychology 111: 119- 129. Selye, H. 1956. The Szress offife. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1974. Stress Without Distress. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott. ___. Silberman, C. 198 1. “Fear.” In Order Under Law: Readings in Criminal Justice, edited by Robert C. Culbertson and Mark R. Tezak. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc. Skogan, W.G. and M.G. Maxfield. 198 1. Coping with Crime. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. Stagner, R. 198 1. “Stress, Strain, Coping, and Defense.” Research on Aging 3:3-32. Sundeen, R.A. and J.T. Mathieu. 1976. “The Urban Elderly: Environments of Fear.” In Crime and the Elderly: Challenge and Response, edited by Jack Goldsmith and Sharon S. Goldsmith. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Taylor, R.B., S.D. Gottfredson, and S. Brower. 1984. “Block Crime and Fear: Defensible Space, Local Social Ties, and Territorial Functioning.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 21:303-331. Time. 1976. “The Elderly: Prisoners of Fear.” Time 108:2 1 (Nov. 29). Time. 1985. “Up in Arms over Crime.” Time 125:28-34. Wart-, M. 1982. “The Accuracy of Public Beliefs about Crime: Further Evidence.” Criminology 20: 185-204. __. 1984. “Fear of Victimization: Why are Women and the Elderly More Afraid?” Social Science Quarterly 65:681-702. Warr, M. and M. Stafford. 1983. “Fear of Victimization: A Look at the Proximate Causes.” Social Forces 61:1033-1043. Wiltz, C. J. 1982. “Fear of Crime, Criminal Victimization and Elderly Blacks.” Phylon 43:283-294.
Yin, P. 1980. “Fear of Crime among the Elderly: Some Issues and Suggestions.” Social Problems ~.
271492-504. 1982. “Fear of Crime as a Problem for the Elderly.” Social Problems 30~240-245.
RANDY L. LaGRANGE University of North Carolina at Wilmington Despite the volume of research on fear of crime among the elderly, the measurement procedures most frequently used are of questionable validity because of theoretical and methodological shortcomings. A conceptualframework for analyzing perceptions of crime ispresentedto avoid the empirical pitfalls in much fear-of-crime research Two recent articlespublished in thegerontological literature on fear of crime are critically reviewed to illustrate the nature of the problem and to demonstrate that policy recommendations regarding fear of crime among the elderly may be seriously misdirected, given the type of research that has been conducted. Suggestions for improving research on this subject are offered so that programmatic and policy decisions may be soundly developed. ABSTRACT:
Social gerontologists have extensively examined fear of crime among the elderly-its causes and consequences, its prevalence and distribution. They also have shaped social policy through reports to funding agencies and publications in professional journals. As a recent review by Ferraro and LaGrange (1987) indicates, over twenty scholarly publications have appeared within the last two decades ostensibly examining fear of crime among the elderly (Braungart, Braungart, and Hoyer 1980; Clarke and Lewis 1982; Clemente and Kleiman 1976; Cutler 1980; Janson and Ryder 1983; Jaycox 1978; Jeffords 1983; Kennedy and Silverman 1985; Lawton and Yaffe 1980; Lebowitz 1975; Lee 1982a, 1982b; Lindquist and Duke 1982; Miethe and Lee 1984; Mullen and Donnermeyer 1985; Norton and Courlander 1982; Pollack and Patterson 1980; Skogan and Maxfield 1981; Sundeen and Mathieu 1976; Warr 1984; Wiltz 1982; Yin 1980, 1982). Despite the volume of research that has been generated, what we know about fear of crime among the elderly is increasingly being questioned. This is indicated in part by contradictory statements and inconsistent research findings over just how fearful the Directall correspondenceto: KennethE Ferraro, Departmentof Sociologyand Gerontology em Illinois University, DeKalb,IL 601 IS. JOURNAL OF AGING STUDIES, Volume 2, Number 3, pages 277-287. Copyright @ 1988 by JAI Press, Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. ISSN: 0890-4065.
Program, North-
278
JOURNAL OF AGING STUDIES
Vol. ~/NO. 311988
elderly really are. The dominant-and popularized-view holds that the elderly are exceptionally fearful, far more than other age groups, and far beyond their actual risk of being victimized (Jaycox 1978; Lindquist and Duke 1982). As a result, it is held that many elderly have isolated themselves from the outside world, live a life of selfimposed confinement, and are captives in their own homes (Braungart, Hoyer, and Braungart 1979; Clemente and Kleiman 1976; Time 1976, 1985). As Warr (1984, p. 68 1) observes, “It is by now perfunctory to begin an article on fear of victimization with dramatic statements about the prevalence of fear in the United States, or with Iurid stories about elderly citizens barricaded in their homes.” Along with Warr, others have questioned findings regarding the relationship between age and fear of crime (LaGrange and Ferraro 1987; Jeffords 1983; Lawton and Yaffe 1980; Yin 1982). In short, these authors recognize that some older persons may indeed be fearful, but that the problem of fear of crime among the elderly has been exaggerated, p~ncipalIy because of conceptual cloudiness and operational obfuscation of the fear of crime concept. This article further develops the latter view. The authors attempt to illustrate how serious conceptual and measurement problems distort many empirical findings, thereby casting doubt on what we really know about fear of crime. We begin our detailed criticism by examining how others have measured “fear of crime,” focusing on those items contained in national surveys that are widely used. Next, two relatively recent studies are critically analyzed to demonstrate how otherwise sound empirical research contributes to the confusion, We have chosen these particular studies for three reasons: (1) they are representative of the problem; (2) they appeared in a leading gerontological journal known for its influence, especially among policy makers and practitioners; and (3) they are not based on national samples, as is the case with so many other studies. This point implies that researchers are still initiating studies with dubious measures of fear of crime, not just analyzing secondary data sources with questionable procedures. Our critique is not limited to the gerontological literature. It includes much of the sociological and criminological literature on fear of crime as well. Ultimately it is our hope to challenge readers to reconsider policy recommendations derived from much of the existing literature. Policies derived from this literature may be misguided, given the type of research that has been conducted. We further suggest that a new wave of research is necessary to improve our understanding of fear of crime.
The Measurement of Fear of Crime Little systematic attention has been devoted to the question of how best to measure fear of crime. In fact, there is considerable confusion over what “fear of crime” really is. DuBow, McCabe, and Kaplan (1979) and Yin (1980) have found definitions of fear of crime to be noticeably lacking in the literature,’ and Garofalo and Laub (1978, p. 246) assert that “what has been measured in research as the ‘fear of crime’ is simply not fear of crime.” The term “fear of crime” is now casually used in the research literature. Warr (1984, p. 68 1) recognized this problem when he relabeled the concept “fear of v~~~~l&l”: “the phrase ‘fear of crime’ has acquired so many divergent meanings in the literature that it is in danger of losing any specificity whatsoever.” Nonetheless, either the message is not getting across to all research audiences, or else it is being ignored.
Are Older People Afraid of Crime?
279
Despite the lack of specificity of the fear of crime concept, there is surprising consistency in the way fear of crime is measured. Although variation exists, the core of the literature centers around two indicators. This is probably due to the widespread access to the two surveys that contain these indicators. The two surveys with the accompanying questions are: (1) National Crime Survey (NW, “How safe do you or would you feel being out alone in your neighborhood at night?“; (2) General Social Survey (GSS), “Is there any area right around here-that is, within a mile-where you would be afraid to walk at night ?” These items are probably familiar to most readers. The second question is the most frequently used measure of fear of crime in the literature (Ferraro and LaGrange 1987). From a strict methodological stance, there are several problems with these measures (or these types of measures): (1) Single-item indicators are generally less desirable than multiple-item indices when measuring complex constructs; (2) The word “crime,” or a specific act that constitutes crime, is not mentioned in either question; (3) Global, single-item indicators are not sensitive to variation in intensity of fear to different crimes; (4) The phrase “do you feel or would you feel” in the NCS question likely has a different meaning to people who regularly go out at night compared to those who do not go out at night; and (5) The common scenario of walking alone at night in both the NCS and GSS questions seems to set up the respondent to reply that he or she would be afraid.2 Because few of us walk alone on the streets at night (because of fear, nowhere to go, nothing to see, etc.), questions of this genre have dubious relevance to our everyday lives, and especially to the everyday lives of the elderly to whom much of this research is directed. There is a more fundamental problem with the standard “fear of crime” measuresmany do not measure fear of crime. To demonstrate this dilemma, we present Figure 1 as a conceptual framework for defining various perceptions about crime. The classification is adapted from DuBow, McCabe, and Kaplan (1979) and includes an example of the type of question for each of the six cells.3 The vertical axis refers to the level of reference of crime perception. These range from the personal (i.e., self-oriented) to the general (i.e., community-oriented). The horizontal axis refers to the type of crime perception and ranges from the cognitive (what we think) to the affective (what we feel). The cognitive dimension on the left end of the continuum encompasses assessments of risk and safety, whereas the affective dimension on the right includes feelings of fear. Finally, different combinations of the level of reference and the type of crime perception in Figure 1 are represented by cells A through F. Note that only cells C and F represent the emotional state of fear (also worry or apprehension) of the respondent; cell C represents fear for others who may be victimized, and cell F represents fear for oneself-what most “fear of crime” researchers assume they are measuring. Cells B and E represent concern about crime (e.g., whether respondent thinks crime is a serious social problem), and cells A and D represent perceived risk of being victimized by crime. The distinction among risks, concerns, and emotions in Figure 1 is not simply a question of semantics (see also Gubrium 1974). The differences are real and profoundly influence empirical results. Furstenberg (197 1) first demonstrated the inappropriateness of mixing measure of crime “concern” with crime “risk” in a reanalysis of survey data from Baltimore. Even more problematic is the tendency to treat measures
280
JOURNAL OF AGING STUDIES
Vol. ~/NO. 311988
FIGURE 1
Classification
and Examples of Crime Perceptions. Type of Perception Affective
Cognitive Level of Reference General
Personal
Judgments A.
Values 6.
L.
Risk to others; crime or safety assessments
Concern about crime to others
Fear for others’ victimization
Do you think that people in this neighborhood are safe inside their homes at night? (Clarke and Lewis 1982)
Choose the single most serious domestic problem (from a list of 10) that you would like to see government do something about. (Furstenberg 1971)
I worry a great deal about the safety of my loved ones from crime and criminals. (Lee 1982a)
D.
E.
F.
Risk to self; safety of self
Concern about crime to self; personal intolerance
Fear for self-victimization
How safe do you feel or would you feel being alone in your neighborhood at night? (Liska et al. 1982)
Are you personally concerned about becoming a victim of crime? (Jaehnig et al. 1981)
How afraid are you of becoming the victim of (76 separate offenses) in your everyday life? (Warr and Stafford 1983)
of crime risk as indicators of crime fear. Consider the familiar question in cell D from Figure 1: “How safe do you feel or would you feel being out alone in your neighborhood at night?” The question asks respondents to assess their perceived level of personal safety based on a particular secenario-being out alone at night. It does not ask respondents if they are (or would be) afraid in this situation. Perceptions of risk and feelings of fear are two distinct reactions to crime. The empirical correlations between global risk and fear measures are not even strong: the absolute value of r ranges from .32 to .48 (Lee 1982a). Many young, black urban males are well aware of their high likelihood of being victimized by crime, but they are not very fearful. The GSS measure “Is there any area right around here-that is, within a milewhere you would be afraid to walk alone at night?” asks respondents how afraid they are rather than how safe they think they are while walking alone at night. Thus, the measure appears to fall within cell F from Figure 1. Unfortunately, the lack of specificity in the overall question, as previously noted, negates its apparent usefulness. We agree with Garofalo and Laub (1978) that this question is more appropriate as a general barometer of the quality of community life than as a meaningful measure of fear of crime.4
281
Are Older People Afraid of Crime?
In short, measurement procedures used by many of the researchers have contributed little to our unde~tanding of fear of crime; the fear of crime concept has multiple meanings and minimal utility. We have gained much insight into perceived risk to crime, especially among the elderly, as well as information on general assessments of the quality of community life. However, while many researchers have measured perceived risks, they assume they have measured fear of crime and interpret their study ~~d~~gs accordingly (Baumer 1985; Kennedy and Silverman 1985; Liska, Lawrence,
and Sanchirico 1982; Taylor, Gottfredson, and Brower 1984). We elaborate on this statement by examining two recent articles that have appeared in a leading and influential gerontological journal. As is shown below, measurement problems confound proper interpretation of study findings.
Two Articles Critiqued A recent paper by Janson and Ryder (1983, p. 207) utilized data from a Los Angeles community survey and reports “a clear relationship between risk of victimization (crime rates) and fear of crime.” By using the geographic divisions of the city of Los Angeles, the investigators examined how Division Crime Rates (DCR) relate to perceptions of crime. Janson and Ryder are to be commended for attempting to examine the relationship between crime risk-“objectively” measured through official crime statistics-and individuals’ perceptions of crime. The following three items were used in forming the index: (1) A question asking respondents what their three greatest problems are. (“Respondents who mentioned crime were coded as 1, otherwise as 0,” Janson and Ryder 1983, p. 209.) (2) A question asking whether living in a high-crime neighborhood is a serious problem with their present housing. (Coded 1 if a problem, 0 otherwise,) (3) A question asking if crime in the streets causes the respondent difficulty in getting around. (Coded 1 if any difficulty, 0 otherwise.) The final index ranges from 0 (crime not a serious problem) to 3 (crime a serious personal problem). Close examination of the indicators used by the authors to measure fear of crime raise serious questions abcut their utility, in terms of both reliability and validity. The authors do not report a reliability estimate for the index, so we do not know how consistently the items relate. The validity of the index is also highly suspect as a measure of fear of crime. It seems that the authors themselves are confused about the meaning of the index, as they usually refer to it as “concern with crime,” but later conclude that they have demonstrated the relationship between DCR and “fear of crime” (1983, p. 211). Using Figure 1 to classify the items used by Janson and Ryder, we suggest that item one is actually a personal value as identi~ed by cell E. Items two and three are probably best characterized as personal judgments-cell D. These items clearly are not measuring fear of crime as identified by cell F. Respondents who are coded “one” on items two and three are not necessarily afraid; they simplyjudge their environment as having some
282
JOURNAL OF AGING STUDIES
Vol. ~/NO. 317 988
crime risks. These respondents may even reorganize their daily lives to avoid being afraid. Since two of the three items in the index are judgments, we interpret their results to suggest that there is a clear relationship between official crime statistics and older adults’ evaluation of risk in their neighborhood. Based on their analysis, it appears that this relationship is stronger for Anglos than for blacks and Mexican Americans. The interpretation of Janson and Ryder’s research may be viewed as related to-and generally confirming-the results of Warr (1982) and others who have studied the accuracy of the public’s estimates of crime. Wan found that there is considerable accuracy of public beliefs about crime. That Janson and Ryder find a stronger relationship between official crime rates and older adults’ judgments of crime among Angles than among blacks or Mexican Ame~cans may be in part due to the consequences of higher educational attainment, such as greater use of the print media. Such hypotheses are certainly tentative due to the mixture ofjudgments and values in their three-item index. In another recent paper titled “Age, Trust, and Perceived Safety from Crime in Rural Areas,” Mullen and Donnermeyer (1985) attempt to focus on perceived safety from crime. Using the Ohio Rural Victim Survey conducted in 1980, they examine the effects of several isolation factors and background variables on trust of neighbors and perceived safety from crime. Their results indicate that perceived trust of neighbors is one of the most important predictors of perceived safety from crime (beta = .3 1). Mullen and Donnermeyer use four measures of perceived safety: (1) How safe do you feel it is for a woman alone at home in your neighborhood during the daylight? (2) How safe do you feel it is for a woman alone at home in your neighborhood during the night? (3) What about a woman walking alone when it is dark-how safe do you feel she is in this neighborhood? (4) What about a woman walking with another adult when it is dark-how safe do you feel they are in this neighborhood? (1985, p. 238). Responses for all of these questions were “very safe,” “somewhat safe,” “unsafe,” and “very unsafe.” The alpha reliability of the index based on the four items is .86. This indicates that the index possesses high reliability. Contrary to previous research, no relationship was found between perceived safety and respondents’ sex. We agree with the authors’ explanation that: “This is probably because of the manner in which perceived safety was measured” (Mullen and Donnermeyer 1985, p. 239X5 Curiously, the authors refer to the typology of DuBow, McCabe, and Kaplan (1979) for classifying perceptions of crime, upon which our Figure 1 is based. They conclude that their index measures an “emotional dimension offeeling that one’s neighborhood is safe from crime with a general rather than a personal basis referent” (1985, p. 238; emphasis added). We agree that they have a general referent. We do not agree, however, that they have measured the “emotional dimension” of a crime perception. In other words, they claim the measure is identified by cell C in our Figure 1, while we feel it is best considered as cell A. Their questions simply ask the respondent to evaluate (judge) the safety of the area for a woman under various conditions. It is quite a different matter to ask a person if he/she is alar for a woman under these varying condi-
Are OlderPeople Afraidof Crime?
283
tions. One is a cognitive assessment, the other is an affective reaction.6 And, as empirical analyses by Lee (1982a) and Warr (1984) demonstrate, indicators of fear of crime and risk of crime are not even highly correlated-for some types of crime they are inversely related. Thus, we would interpret their major results as reflecting the fact that a safer assessment of the neighborhood for women is associated with trust of neighbors. This may be an important finding, as it suggests that the quality of neighborhood cohesion conditions the effect of actual crime rates on judgments of risk of criminal victimization. However, the authors generalize their results far beyond the data they collected and analyzed: “The research findings here indicate that programs dealing with crime and fear of crime in rural areas should give close attention to the role of trust in neighbors” (1985, p. 24 1; emphasis added). We recommend instead that (1) the relationship between perceived safety from crime and fear of crime be empirically established rather than assumed to be opposite, and (2) future research examine the interrelations of the various crime perceptions as identified in Figure 1. Specifically, we challenge researchers to include all of the example questions noted in Figure 1 in social surveys; then one can empirically examine how judgments, values, and emotions are related.
Improving our Knowledge In addition to suggesting the use of a conceptual framework (such as the one identified in Figure 1) to improve our knowledge of fear of crime, we would like to emphasize certain points. First, indicators of fear of crime should measure the emotional state of fear rather than judgments of risk or even general concerns about the crime problem. Second, survey questions should make explicit reference to crime in order to enhance object consistency. General or implied crime referents are not likely to produce valid and reliable variables. To this end, we recommend that researchers differentiate fear in terms of the types of crime (e.g., robbery, murder, consumer fraud). Several studies have used specific victimization and have produced important results (Furstenberg 1971; Lalli and Savitz 1976; Sundeen and Mathieu 1976; Warr 1984; Warr and Stafford 1983). Third, questions intended to measure fear of crime should be stated in nonhypothetical form. Some questions, such as the example for cell D in Figure 1, ask how a person feels or would feel in particularly unusual situations, such as being alone at night anywhere within a mile of their home. It would be better to obtain specific reports about how individuals actually do feel in everyduy situations. Studies by Janson and Ryder (1983) and Warr (1982) suggest that older people are fairly accurate injudging (or estimating) crime risk. However, how afraid they are is still debated. Yin (1982, p. 240) argues that “fear of crime is a less severe problem for the elderly than previous reports suggest.” We feel that there may be some merit in this conclusion after reviewing data from the Harris polls (1975 and 1981), Gallup poll (1982), and the Figgie Report on Fear of Crime (1983; LaGrange and Ferraro 1987). By considering several different perceptions of crime, three major premises can be derived from these data.
284
JOURNAL OF AGING STUDIES
Vol. ~/NO. 3/l 988
The elderly are no more fearful of crime than any other age group. In actuality, data from an ABC News Poll conducted in 1982 show that older people are the least likely of all age groups to worry about certain types of crime. People under 25 years of age are the most likely to worry about car or property vandalism, home burglary, rape, and murder. On the other hand, older people are slightly more likely to worry about street robbery or being injured by a robber or burglar. The relationships between age and worry about these three crimes are curvilinear (J-shaped).7 Assuredly, some older people are very afraid of crime. However, when considering different types of crime, there is no evidence to suggest that older people are more fearful than any other age group (LaGrange and Ferraro 1987).
The public under 65 years of age considers fear of crime a more serious problem for older people than older people consider it for themselves. This fact is easily discerned by comparing self and others referents in the widely used surveys on the Aging (Harris 198 1, p. 10). In 198 1,74% of the public under 65 years of age, compared to 58% of the public 65 and older, reported that fear of crime was a very serious problem for older people. However, when the older adults themselves were asked about their fear of crime, only about one-quarter reported such fear. It appears that the idea of older people being afraid of crime is becoming reified in the public’s mind. Unfortunately, social scientists seem to be biased in this direction as well. Rather than assuming that fear of crime is rampant among elderly Americans, social researchers need to measure fear of crime and examine its relationship to age and other variables.
The more diffuse and vague the measure of “fear of crime,” the more likely that elderly respondents will score high on it. Data from the Figgie Report (1983) indicate that people 60 years and older have substantially lower levels of concrete fear and slightly higher levels of fonniess fear. This finding deserves further investigation; it may be that older people are not actually afraid but more uncertain and anxious about their environment, or genuinely more concerned about the overall quality of life in their neighborhoods (Garofalo and Laub 1978; Gubrium 1974). Could the elderly’s “fear of crime” be part of a larger orientation to their environment? Also, is the public reification of “fear of crime among the elderly” increasing older adults’ formless fear?
CONCLUSIONS In sum, much of the literature on fear of crime among the elderly uses two types of measures. One type examines judgments about the risk of crime as identified by cells A and D in Figure 1. Studies by Warr (1982) and Janson and Ryder (1983) suggest that older people are fairly accurate in judging their probable risk of criminal victimization. The other type of measure uses vague indicators of fear of crime, often without reference to the word crime or any type of crime, and generally beyond the realm of the elderly’s everyday experiences. Many of these measures are difficult to classify according to the framework presented in Figure 1 because of their seeming remoteness to fear of crime. As previously suggested, the bulk of research in the latter type of research
285
Are Older People Afraid of Crime?
is likely to overestimate the prevalence of fear of crime among the elderly. Yin (1982)
is probably correct in asserting that fear of crime among the elderly has been exaggerated. However, until more methodologically sound studies are completedespecially with valid measures of fear of crime-such a conclusion should be regarded as plausible but tentative.
NOTES 1. In a review of the literature Yin (1980) found only one definition: “the amount of anxiety and concern that persons have of becoming a victim” (Sundeen and Mathieu 1976, p. 55). We prefer a more recent definition by Garofalo (198 1, p. 840): “an emotional reaction characterized by a sense of danger and anxiety” as a result of victimization. This often involves a series of complex changes in physiological functioning, especially in the endocrine system (Selye 1956, 1974; Silberman 1981; Stagner 1981). 2. Perhaps a more revealing question would be “who wouldn’t be afraid?” given the dangerous scenario of the question. 3. A thorough discussion of this framework is presented in Ferraro and LaGrange (1987). 4. For an appropriate way to measure fear of crime, consider the method used by Warr and Stafford (1983) that is reported in cell C in Figure 1. (We return to this issue later in the discussion.) However, even the best-designed measures of fear of crime have limitations. The emotional state of a person responding to a questionnaire item about fear of being mugged is quite different than his or her emotional state when actually confronted by a mugger on the street. Garofalo (1981) refers to this as the difference between anti@ated and actual fear. Social surveys of fear of crime are limited to measuring anticipated fear or retrospectively assessing fear. 5. Mullen and Donnermeyer (1985) mention that they wanted to avoid response bias among males who might be reluctant to admit persona1 concerns about safety. 6. Whereas it might be argued that fear of crime is the opposite of a fee&g of safety, the authors inappropriately assume that fear of crime is the opposite of a cognitive assessment (i.e., judgment) of safety as measured in their research. 7. We shift terminology here from “fear” to “worry” because this is the way it is phrased in the ABC News Poll. Whereas the two terms may elicit slightly different connotations (fear being more immediate and acute, worry being more remote and diffuse), both fear and worry are emotional reactions and would fall within cell F (or cell C) in Figure 1.
REFERENCES Baumer, T.L. 1985. “Testing a General Model of Fear of Crime: Data from a National Sample.” Jou~l of Rebecca in Crime and ~e~~~~~ 221239-255. Braungart, M.M., R.G. Braungart, and W.J. Hoyer. 1980. “Age, Sex, and Social Factors in Fear of Crime.” Sociological Focus 1355-56. Braungart, M.M., W.J. Hoyer, and R.G. Braungart. 1979. “Fear of Crime and the Elderly.” In Police and the Elderly, edited by A. P. Goldstein and William J. Hoyer, New York: Pergamon Press. Clarke, AH and M. Lewis. 1982. “Fear of Crime among the Elderly.” ~~~~ Journal of ~~rni~~~~
22~49-62.
Clemente, F. and M. Kieiman. 1976. “Fear of Crime among the Aged.” Gerontologist l&207-2 10. Cutler, S.J. 1980. “Safety on the Streets: Cohort Changes in Fear.” International Journal of Aging and Human Development 10:373-384.
286
JOURNAL OF AGING STUDIES
Vol. ~/NO. 311988
DuBow, F., E. McCabe, and G. Kaplan. 1979. Reactions to Crime: A Criticul Review of the Literature. Washington, DC: National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice; U.S. Gove~ment Printing Office. Ferraro, K.F., and R. LaGrange. 1987. “The Measurement of Fear of Crime.” Sociofogicat btquiry 57:70-101. Figgie Report. 1983. Figgie Report on Fear of Crime: America Afraid. Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics: 203. Furstenberg, F.F., Jr. 197 1. “Pubtic Reaction to Crime in the Street.” American Scholar 40~601-610. Gallup, G.H. 1982. 7%~Gallup Report, Number 198. Princeton, NJ: The Gallup Poll. Garofalo, J. 198 1. “The Fear of Crime: Causes and Consequences.” Journal of CriminalLaw and C~rn~~~ 72:839-X57. Garofaio, J. and J. Laub. 1978. “The Fear of Crime: Broadening our Perspective.” Victiology 3:242-253. Gubrium, J.F. 1974. “Victimization in Old Age.” Crime and Delinquency 201245250. Harris, L. and Associates. 1975. 2% its and Read of Aging in America. New York: L. Harris & Associates. 198 1. Aging in the Eighties: America in Transition. New York: L. Harris & Associates. -* Jaehnig, W.B., D.H. Weaver, and F. Fico. 198 1. “Reporting Crime and Fear of Crime in Three Communities.” Jou~l of Commu~a~n 3 1:88-96. Janson, P. and L.K. Ryder. 1983. “Crime and the Elderly: The Relationship Between Risk and Fear.” The Gerontoiogist 23:207-212. Jaycox, V. 1978. “The Elderly’s Fear of Crime: Rational or Irrational.” Victimology 3:329-334. Jeffords, CR. 1983. “The Situational Relationship Between Age and Fear of Crime.” Intemutional Journal of Aging and Human D~e~~~nt 17: 103 - 111. Kennedy, L.W. and H. Krahn. 1984. “Rural-Urban Origin and Fear of Crime: The Case for “Rural Baggage’.” Rural Sociology 49:247-260. Kennedy, L.W. and R.A. Silverman. 1985. “Significant Others and Fear of Crime among the Elderly.” ~nte~~~~ Journal of Aging and Human D~e~~~nt 20~24 l-256. LaGrange, R.L. and K.F. Ferraro. 1987. “The Elderly’s Fear of Crime: A Critical Examination of the Research.” Research on Aging 9:372-39 1. Laili, M. and L. Savitz. 1976. “Fear of Crime in the School Enterprise and Its Consequences.” ~u~a~n and Urban Society 8:40 l-4 16. Lawton, M.P. and S. Yaffe. 1980. “Victimization and Fear of Crime in Elderly Public Housing Tenants.” Journal of Gerontology 35~768-779. Lebowitz, B. 1975. “Age and Fearfulness: Personal and Situational Factors.” Journal of Gerontology 3~696-700. Lee, G.R. 1982a. “Sex Difference in Fear of Crime among Older Peopie.” Research on Aging 4:284-298. _. 1982b. “Residential Location and Fear of Crime among the Elderly.” Rural Socio&y 47:655-669. Lindquist, J.H. and J.M. Duke. 1982. “The Elderly Victim at Risk: Explaining the Fearvictimization Paradox.” Criminology 20:115- 126. Liska, A.E., J. Lawrence, and A. Sanchirico. 1982. “Fear of Crime as a Social Fact.” Social Forces 60:760-770. Miethe, T. and G.R. Lee. 1984. “Fear of Crime among Older People: A Reassessment of the Predictive Power of Crime-related Factors.” Sociorogical Quarterly 25~397-415. Mullen, R.E. and J.F. Donnermeyer. 1985. “Age, Trust, and Perceived Safety from Crime in Rural Areas.” The Gerontologist 25:237-242.
Are Older People Afraid of Crime?
287
Norton, L. and M. Courlander. 1982. “Fear of Crime among the Elderly: The Role of Crime Prevention Programs.” 7’he Gerontologist 22:388-393. Pollack, L. and A.H. Patterson. 1980. “Territoriality and Fear of Crime in Elderly and Nonelderly Homeowners.” Journal of Social Psychology 111: 119- 129. Selye, H. 1956. The Szress offife. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1974. Stress Without Distress. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott. ___. Silberman, C. 198 1. “Fear.” In Order Under Law: Readings in Criminal Justice, edited by Robert C. Culbertson and Mark R. Tezak. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc. Skogan, W.G. and M.G. Maxfield. 198 1. Coping with Crime. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. Stagner, R. 198 1. “Stress, Strain, Coping, and Defense.” Research on Aging 3:3-32. Sundeen, R.A. and J.T. Mathieu. 1976. “The Urban Elderly: Environments of Fear.” In Crime and the Elderly: Challenge and Response, edited by Jack Goldsmith and Sharon S. Goldsmith. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Taylor, R.B., S.D. Gottfredson, and S. Brower. 1984. “Block Crime and Fear: Defensible Space, Local Social Ties, and Territorial Functioning.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 21:303-331. Time. 1976. “The Elderly: Prisoners of Fear.” Time 108:2 1 (Nov. 29). Time. 1985. “Up in Arms over Crime.” Time 125:28-34. Wart-, M. 1982. “The Accuracy of Public Beliefs about Crime: Further Evidence.” Criminology 20: 185-204. __. 1984. “Fear of Victimization: Why are Women and the Elderly More Afraid?” Social Science Quarterly 65:681-702. Warr, M. and M. Stafford. 1983. “Fear of Victimization: A Look at the Proximate Causes.” Social Forces 61:1033-1043. Wiltz, C. J. 1982. “Fear of Crime, Criminal Victimization and Elderly Blacks.” Phylon 43:283-294.
Yin, P. 1980. “Fear of Crime among the Elderly: Some Issues and Suggestions.” Social Problems ~.
271492-504. 1982. “Fear of Crime as a Problem for the Elderly.” Social Problems 30~240-245.