Journal of Traumatic Stress June 2014, 27, 365–369
BRIEF REPORT
Mobilizing Victim Services: The Role of Reporting to the Police Heather Zaykowski Department of Sociology, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Victim assistance programs have grown dramatically in response to the victim’s rights movement and concern over difficulty navigating victim services. Evidence, however, indicates that very few victims seek assistance. The present study examined factors associated with victim service use including reporting to the police, the victim’s demographic characteristics, the victim’s injury, offender’s use of a weapon, the victim’s relationship to the offender, and the victim’s mental and physical distress. Data came from a subset of the National Crime Victimization Survey 2008–2011 (N = 4,746), a stratified multistage cluster sample survey of persons age 12 years and older in the United States. Logistic regression models indicated that fewer than 10% of victims of violent crime sought help from victim services. Reporting to the police increased the odds of seeking services by 3 times. In addition, the odds of victims attacked by an intimate partner seeking services were 4.5 times greater than victims attacked by strangers. Findings suggest that additional exploratory work is needed in uncovering the mechanism of police involvement in linking victims to services. Specifically, do police understand what services are available to victims and why are police more likely to inform some types of victims about services more than others?
Victim assistance agencies have grown since the 1970s in response to increasing concern for victim’s rights and health concerns (U.S. Department of Justice, 2012). Very few victims of violent crime, however, seek help from victim services (New & Berliner, 2000; Sims, Yost, & Abbott, 2005). This is particularly concerning because agencies play a critical role in addressing mental and physical health problems associated with criminal victimization and they also inform victims of their rights. The current study addresses two limitations in prior research (for a review, see McCart, Smith, & Sawyer, 2010). First, much of the literature on victim service usage is based on small samples that are not generalizable, and therefore may not be applicable to other regions. Second, although men are eligible for many victim services, prior research has focused almost exclusively on women. Today every state has programs available to victims for general or specific types of victimization that specialize in a variety of services such as assistance with filing compensation claims, hotlines, legal aid, counseling, support groups, and financial assistance (U.S. Department of Justice, 2012). Victim services provide an important role for persons who experience trauma
as a result of crime. Violent victimization has serious consequences including physical injuries and many mental health outcomes including anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance abuse, and interpersonal maladjustment (Kilpatrick & Acierno, 2003; New & Berliner, 2000). Many victims, however, do not seek services because they are unaware of the options available to them (Sims et al., 2005). An important link to victim services is the police. Among violent crime victims from 2000–2009, 14% of victims who reported to the police compared to 4% who did not report received assistance from victim services (Langton, 2011). Sims et al. (2005) argue that by not reporting to the police, the victim “has eliminated one of the most common sources of information about such programs” (p. 364). They also, however, contend that the police hold great power in making judgments about which victims may or may not need services. In this study, help seeking for victims of violent crime, defined in this study as rape/sexual assault, robbery, and physical assault, was examined. The aims of the study were to assess variation in usage of victim services in a national sample of violent crime victims and determine the relative effect of victim and incident characteristics, particularly the role of reporting to the police, on help seeking.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Heather Zaykowski, Department of Sociology, University of Massachusetts Boston, 100 Morrissey Boulevard, Boston, MA, 02125–3393. E-mail: [email protected]
Method Participants and Procedure Data for this study came from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS; 2008–2011) incident files (U.S. Department of Justice, 2013), which were deidentified datasets
C 2014 International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies. View Copyright this article online at wileyonlinelibrary.com DOI: 10.1002/jts.21913
365
366
Zaykowski
available through the Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR). The data are available to researchers by creating a free account and agreeing to the ICPSR’s terms of use. The Institutional Review Board of the University of Massachusetts-Boston approved this research. The survey years 2008 through 2011 contained information about mental and physical health and related consequences of victimization that were not available for earlier surveys. The surveys were stratified multistate cluster samples of approximately 50,000 households each survey year that included noninstitutionalized persons age 12 years and older living in households across the United States. Because the design was not a simple random sample, there is some variation in the probability of selection in addition to nonsampling error. The response rate for the NCVS averaged over 95%. Surveys from 2008 through 2011 were combined into one dataset. Trained researchers conducted in-person interviews with all members in each sampled household using a screening questionnaire. This screening questionnaire asked subjects about demographic information and about events that may have happened to them in the past 6 months. For example, subjects were asked “has anyone attacked or threatened you in any of these ways: With any weapon, for instance, a gun or knife . . . ? With anything like a baseball bat, frying pan, scissors, or stick . . . ?” If subjects had experienced any of the situations, they were then asked to complete an additional questionnaire for every incident. The incident questionnaire asked subjects where the incident occurred, how well they knew the perpetrator, how the perpetrator attacked the victim and if any weapons were used, what injuries the victim received, how the crime affected the victim’s mental and physical health, what type of help the victim sought including if the incident was reported to the police, if there was anyone else present at the scene of the incident, and the victim’s relationship to the offender. The trained interviewer determined, based on this information, into which crime category the incident fit. The dataset of 27,795 contained both property and violent crime victims. Only victims of violent crime, however, were asked if they sought assistance from a victim service agency. Therefore, the sample was limited to victimization by violence (sexual assault/rape, physical assault, and robbery). Included cases significantly differed from excluded cases (i.e., property crime victims) in that a greater proportion of violent crime victims were black/African American, male, not married, had lower household incomes, and were younger in age (p < .10). Subjects whose household income was unknown were retained in the sample through a dummy variable (compare with Kaukinen, Meyer, & Akers, 2013). Subjects with missing data were excluded from the analysis using listwise deletion (n = 330). The final sample included N = 4,746 cases of whom few sought services (7.8%). Table 1 provides the descriptive statistics for the sample by use of victim services.
Table 1 Demographic and Victimization Characteristics by Use of Any Victim Service Used service
Variable Sex Female Male Race/ethnicity White Black Hispanic Other/Mixed Income < $15,000 $15,000–$34,999 $35,000 + Missing Urban area Yes No Married Yes No Type of victimization Sexual assault Robbery Physical assault Offender status Intimate Family Friend Acquaintance Stranger More than 1 Not known Bystander Yes No Reported to police Yes No Job problem Yes No
Yes
No
(n = 372)
(n = 4,374)
n or M
% or SD
n or M
% or SD
277 95
74.5 25.5
2,063 2,311
47.2 52.8
233 65 50 24
62.6 17.5 13.4 6.5
2,852 621 628 273
65.2 14.2 14.4 6.2
χ2 or t 102.21***
3.12
8.63* 86 80 127 79
23.1 21.5 34.1 21.2
781 863 1,645 1,085
17.9 19.7 37.6 24.8
315 57
84.7 15.3
3,726 648
85.2 14.8
0.07
4.39* 82 290
22.0 78.0
1,183 3,191
27.0 73.0 47.64***
43 45 284
11.6 12.1 76.3
170 514 3,690
3.9 11.8 84.4 200.48***
132 46 16 55 26 58 39
35.5 12.4 4.3 14.8 7.0 15.6 10.5
530 277 226 882 911 856 692
12.1 6.3 5.2 20.2 20.8 19.6 15.8 4.82*
183 189
49.2 50.8
2,410 1,964
55.1 44.9 108.36***
283 89
76.1 23.9
2,098 2,276
48.0 52.0 100.86***
115 257
30.9 69.1
Journal of Traumatic Stress DOI 10.1002/jts. Published on behalf of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies.
536 3838
12.3 87.7 (Continued)
367
Mobilizing Victim Services: The Role of Police
Table 1 Continued
examined interactions between the primary factor of interest, reported to the police, and incident characteristics. There were no substantive differences in results using survey weights and the unweighted sample; therefore, all analyses were conducted using the unweighted sample.
Used service Yes
No
(n = 372)
(n = 4,374)
Variable
n or M
% or SD
n or M
% or SD
Family problem Yes No Agea Household sizea Mental distressa Physical distressa
129 243 35.0 2.3 4.1 2.5
34.7 65.3 14.2 1.4 3.0 2.6
722 3652 34.6 2.4 2.1 0.9
76.92*** 16.5 83.5 16.16 −0.53 1.2 1.52 2.7 −12.07*** 1.9 −11.46***
Results χ2 or t
Note. Mean values and t test results presented. Levene’s test for equality of variances was significant, indicating that equal variances cannot be assumed. a For continuous variables 372 subjects used services and 4,374 subjects did not use services. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Measures The dependent variable, victim service help seeking, was measured by the question “Did you (or someone in your household) receive any help or advice from any office or agency—other than the police—that deals with victims of crime?” Independent measures included demographic indicators, incident characteristics, and different types of problems victims experienced after being victimized including job and family problems, and mental and physical health issues. Job and family problems were measured through dichotomous variables. Mental health problems included being worried or anxious, angry, sad or depressed, vulnerable, violated, mistrustful, unsafe, or otherwise impacted. The items in mental health were combined into a scale from 0 to 8 (α = .94). Physical health problems included headaches, trouble sleeping, changes in eating or drinking, an upset stomach, fatigue, high blood pressure, muscle tension, or some other problem. The scale ranged from 0 to 8 (α = .89). Data Analysis Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze the impact of police contact on seeking victim services. Analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics 19. First, sample characteristics were examined with respect to seeking services. Chi-square and t tests were conducted with respect to significant differences between victims who did and did not use victim services. Next, multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze the relative impact of victim demographic characteristics, incident characteristics, and victim distress on using victim services. Of particular interest was the effect of reporting to the police on mobilizing victim services. Subsequent analyses
Table 1 shows the relationship between demographic and victimization characteristics by use of service. Use of victim services was significantly different by sex, household income, marital status, the type of harm experienced, victim–offender relationship, the presence of a bystander, if the incident was reported to the police, and among variables for victims who had job and family problems, and by the level of mental and physical distress. Temporal changes in service use between 2008 and 2011 were examined, but there were no significant differences in service mobilization. In light of the lack of variation by year, the analyses were treated as cross sectional. No substantive outliers were discovered. Although there were significant correlations between mental and physical distress (r = .71, p < .001), additional diagnostics revealed that there were no multicollinearity problems in the models (variance inflation factor < 5). Table 2 displays the results of the logistic regression analyzing the impact of victim and incident characteristics on victim service mobilization. Predictors of service usage included female victim, sexual assault victim, reported to the police, and several categories of victim offender relationship: intimate, family, acquaintance, unknown relationship, and more than one offender. Victims who had job problems and physical distress were more likely to contact victim services. Subsequent analyses (Table 2) examined interactions between reporting and incident characteristics in exploring differences in the impact of reporting on help seeking. Interactions were explored with all incident characteristics; however, only relationship factors were significant and improved the model fit. Results indicated that victims who were harmed by intimate partners and family had the greatest gain in service usage from calling the police. Victims harmed by an acquaintance had modest gains in the odds of seeking services. Calling the police did not significantly increase the odds of services utilization for friends, relationship unknown, and multiple offenders. Discussion Although service providers address and treat traumatic stress resulting from criminal victimization, very few victims actually have contact with these services. Victim services were more likely to be utilized when the incident was known to the police, the victim was female, and the relationship involved greater intimacy. This confirms prior research (Langton, 2011; Sims et al., 2005). Victims of intimate and family violence received the greatest benefit from reporting relative to other relationship categories as shown in the interaction
Journal of Traumatic Stress DOI 10.1002/jts. Published on behalf of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies.
368
Zaykowski
Table 2 Logistic Regression Analyses for Mobilizing Victim Services Base model Variable Female Race/ethnicity Black Hispanic Other/mixed race Income < $15,000 $15,000–$34,999 Missing Urban Married Type of victimization Sexual assault Robbery Offender status Intimate Family Friend Acquaintance More than 1 Not known Bystander Reported to police Job problem Family problem Age Household size Mental distress Physical distress Interactions Reported × intimate Reported × family Reported × friend Reported × acquaintance Reported × more than 1 Reported × not known Constant
Interactions model
OR
95% CI
OR
95% CI
1.67***
[1.27, 2.19]
1.68**
[1.28, 2.20]
1.11 1.10 1.02
[0.81, 1.53] [0.78, 1.56] [0.64, 1.64]
1.12 1.09 1.04
[0.81, 1.54] [0.77, 1.55] [0.64, 1.67]
0.89 0.88 0.67* 1.04 0.88
[0.64,1.23] [0.64, 1.21] [0.49, 0.93] [0.75, 1.44] [0.65, 1.18]
0.89 0.87 0.67* 1.05 0.87
[0.64, 1.25] [0.63, 1.20] [0.48, 0.92] [0.76, 1.45] [0.65, 1.18]
2.39*** 0.98
[1.59, 3.59] [0.69, 1.41]
2.40*** 1.03
[1.59, 3.62] [0.72, 1.48]
4.52*** 3.94*** 1.80 1.93** 1.76* 1.91* 0.95 3.01*** 1.66*** 0.92 1.00 0.99 1.03 1.17***
[2.82, 7.23] [2.30, 6.76] [0.91, 3.55] [1.18, 3.17] [1.08, 2.88] [1.13, 3.22] [0.75, 1.21] [2.32, 3.91] [1.23, 2.24] [0.68, 1.24] [0.99, 1.00] [0.89, 1.09] [0.97, 1.09] [1.09, 1.25]
1.64 0.78 1.27 1.06 1.26 1.07 0.94 1.06 1.65*** 0.92 1.00 0.99 1.03 1.17***
[0.78, 3.44] [0.22, 2.83] [0.50, 3.25] [0.51, 2.20] [0.58, 2.75] [0.46, 2.50] [0.73, 1.20] [0.48, 2.33] [1.22, 2.23] [0.68, 1.24] [0.99, 1.00] [0.89, 1.09] [0.97, 1.10] [1.09, 1.25]
4.58** 8.90** 1.62 2.69 1.91 2.63 0.01***
[1.79, 11.74] [2.10, 37.79] [0.43, 6.08] [1.01, 7.21] [0.70, 5.24] [0.89, 7.80]
0.01***
Note. N = 4,746. The references categories are white for race/ethnicity, income $35,000 and over for household income, physical assault for type of crime, and stranger for victim-offender relationship. The base model −2 log likelihood = 2195.94 and Nagelkerke R2 = .20. The interaction model −2 log likelihood = 2178.72 and Nagelkerke R2 = .21. OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
models. This finding may be due to several factors including police discretion and knowledge of services, services available, and unmeasured barriers to services. Police may perceive service agencies to be more appropriate than themselves to handle victims’ needs and that such services can better address victim trauma. Of greater concern, however, is that police may perceive some victims to be more worthy
than others (Sims et al., 2005). Victim service mobilization may also be impacted by the type of services that are available and perceived eligibility. Some victims may not be eligible for publically funded services, which are limited by statutory definitions. For example, victims who had contributed to the crime are often excluded from services (Trulson, 2005). Finally, agencies may want to consider providing or linking victims
Journal of Traumatic Stress DOI 10.1002/jts. Published on behalf of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies.
Mobilizing Victim Services: The Role of Police
to wrap-around services that address unemployment, medical issues, and other consequences of trauma. Although this study provides some key insights into understanding factors associated with seeking victim services, there are several limitations and important questions that remain. Police contact was an important predictor of mobilizing services, but additional research is needed to understand police discretion as a mechanism connecting victims to services. It is also possible that victims may not seek services because they do not view their own experiences as crimes or serious enough to consider victim services, or do not know of services that may be available to them. This study was unable to explore questions along this line of inquiry using the NCVS, but I believe that these would be fruitful areas for additional research. References
369
Langton, L. (2011). Use of victim service agencies by victims of serious violent crime, 1993–2009. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/uvsavsvc9309.pdf McCart, M. R., Smith, D. W., & Sawyer, G. K. (2010). Help seeking among victims of crime: A review of the empirical literature. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 23, 198–206. doi:10.1002/jts.20509 New, M., & Berliner, L. (2000). Mental health service utilization by victims of crime. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 13, 693–707. Sims, B., Yost, B., & Abbott, C. (2005). Use and nonuse of victim service programs: Implications from a statewide survey of crime victims. Criminology and Public Policy, 4, 361–384. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2005.00026.x Trulson, C. R. (2005). Victims’ rights and services: Eligibility, exclusion, and victim worth. Criminology and Public Policy, 4, 399–414. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2005.00029.x
Kaukinen, C. E., Meyer, S., & Akers, C. (2013). Status compatibility and helpseeking behaviors among female intimate partner violence victims. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28, 577–601. doi:10.1177/0886260512455516
U.S. Department of Justice. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2013). National Crime Victimization Survey, 2008–2011. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR). Retrieved from http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NACJD/series/95
Kilpatrick, D. G., & Acierno, R. (2003). Mental health needs of crime victims: Epidemiology and outcomes. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 16, 119–132. doi:10.1023/A:1022891005388
U.S. Department of Justice. Office for Victims of Crime (2012). Rising to the challenge: A new era in victim services. Retrieved from http://www.ovc.gov/pubs/reporttonation2011/ReporttoNation2011.pdf
Journal of Traumatic Stress DOI 10.1002/jts. Published on behalf of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies.
BRIEF REPORT
Mobilizing Victim Services: The Role of Reporting to the Police Heather Zaykowski Department of Sociology, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Victim assistance programs have grown dramatically in response to the victim’s rights movement and concern over difficulty navigating victim services. Evidence, however, indicates that very few victims seek assistance. The present study examined factors associated with victim service use including reporting to the police, the victim’s demographic characteristics, the victim’s injury, offender’s use of a weapon, the victim’s relationship to the offender, and the victim’s mental and physical distress. Data came from a subset of the National Crime Victimization Survey 2008–2011 (N = 4,746), a stratified multistage cluster sample survey of persons age 12 years and older in the United States. Logistic regression models indicated that fewer than 10% of victims of violent crime sought help from victim services. Reporting to the police increased the odds of seeking services by 3 times. In addition, the odds of victims attacked by an intimate partner seeking services were 4.5 times greater than victims attacked by strangers. Findings suggest that additional exploratory work is needed in uncovering the mechanism of police involvement in linking victims to services. Specifically, do police understand what services are available to victims and why are police more likely to inform some types of victims about services more than others?
Victim assistance agencies have grown since the 1970s in response to increasing concern for victim’s rights and health concerns (U.S. Department of Justice, 2012). Very few victims of violent crime, however, seek help from victim services (New & Berliner, 2000; Sims, Yost, & Abbott, 2005). This is particularly concerning because agencies play a critical role in addressing mental and physical health problems associated with criminal victimization and they also inform victims of their rights. The current study addresses two limitations in prior research (for a review, see McCart, Smith, & Sawyer, 2010). First, much of the literature on victim service usage is based on small samples that are not generalizable, and therefore may not be applicable to other regions. Second, although men are eligible for many victim services, prior research has focused almost exclusively on women. Today every state has programs available to victims for general or specific types of victimization that specialize in a variety of services such as assistance with filing compensation claims, hotlines, legal aid, counseling, support groups, and financial assistance (U.S. Department of Justice, 2012). Victim services provide an important role for persons who experience trauma
as a result of crime. Violent victimization has serious consequences including physical injuries and many mental health outcomes including anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance abuse, and interpersonal maladjustment (Kilpatrick & Acierno, 2003; New & Berliner, 2000). Many victims, however, do not seek services because they are unaware of the options available to them (Sims et al., 2005). An important link to victim services is the police. Among violent crime victims from 2000–2009, 14% of victims who reported to the police compared to 4% who did not report received assistance from victim services (Langton, 2011). Sims et al. (2005) argue that by not reporting to the police, the victim “has eliminated one of the most common sources of information about such programs” (p. 364). They also, however, contend that the police hold great power in making judgments about which victims may or may not need services. In this study, help seeking for victims of violent crime, defined in this study as rape/sexual assault, robbery, and physical assault, was examined. The aims of the study were to assess variation in usage of victim services in a national sample of violent crime victims and determine the relative effect of victim and incident characteristics, particularly the role of reporting to the police, on help seeking.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Heather Zaykowski, Department of Sociology, University of Massachusetts Boston, 100 Morrissey Boulevard, Boston, MA, 02125–3393. E-mail: [email protected]
Method Participants and Procedure Data for this study came from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS; 2008–2011) incident files (U.S. Department of Justice, 2013), which were deidentified datasets
C 2014 International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies. View Copyright this article online at wileyonlinelibrary.com DOI: 10.1002/jts.21913
365
366
Zaykowski
available through the Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR). The data are available to researchers by creating a free account and agreeing to the ICPSR’s terms of use. The Institutional Review Board of the University of Massachusetts-Boston approved this research. The survey years 2008 through 2011 contained information about mental and physical health and related consequences of victimization that were not available for earlier surveys. The surveys were stratified multistate cluster samples of approximately 50,000 households each survey year that included noninstitutionalized persons age 12 years and older living in households across the United States. Because the design was not a simple random sample, there is some variation in the probability of selection in addition to nonsampling error. The response rate for the NCVS averaged over 95%. Surveys from 2008 through 2011 were combined into one dataset. Trained researchers conducted in-person interviews with all members in each sampled household using a screening questionnaire. This screening questionnaire asked subjects about demographic information and about events that may have happened to them in the past 6 months. For example, subjects were asked “has anyone attacked or threatened you in any of these ways: With any weapon, for instance, a gun or knife . . . ? With anything like a baseball bat, frying pan, scissors, or stick . . . ?” If subjects had experienced any of the situations, they were then asked to complete an additional questionnaire for every incident. The incident questionnaire asked subjects where the incident occurred, how well they knew the perpetrator, how the perpetrator attacked the victim and if any weapons were used, what injuries the victim received, how the crime affected the victim’s mental and physical health, what type of help the victim sought including if the incident was reported to the police, if there was anyone else present at the scene of the incident, and the victim’s relationship to the offender. The trained interviewer determined, based on this information, into which crime category the incident fit. The dataset of 27,795 contained both property and violent crime victims. Only victims of violent crime, however, were asked if they sought assistance from a victim service agency. Therefore, the sample was limited to victimization by violence (sexual assault/rape, physical assault, and robbery). Included cases significantly differed from excluded cases (i.e., property crime victims) in that a greater proportion of violent crime victims were black/African American, male, not married, had lower household incomes, and were younger in age (p < .10). Subjects whose household income was unknown were retained in the sample through a dummy variable (compare with Kaukinen, Meyer, & Akers, 2013). Subjects with missing data were excluded from the analysis using listwise deletion (n = 330). The final sample included N = 4,746 cases of whom few sought services (7.8%). Table 1 provides the descriptive statistics for the sample by use of victim services.
Table 1 Demographic and Victimization Characteristics by Use of Any Victim Service Used service
Variable Sex Female Male Race/ethnicity White Black Hispanic Other/Mixed Income < $15,000 $15,000–$34,999 $35,000 + Missing Urban area Yes No Married Yes No Type of victimization Sexual assault Robbery Physical assault Offender status Intimate Family Friend Acquaintance Stranger More than 1 Not known Bystander Yes No Reported to police Yes No Job problem Yes No
Yes
No
(n = 372)
(n = 4,374)
n or M
% or SD
n or M
% or SD
277 95
74.5 25.5
2,063 2,311
47.2 52.8
233 65 50 24
62.6 17.5 13.4 6.5
2,852 621 628 273
65.2 14.2 14.4 6.2
χ2 or t 102.21***
3.12
8.63* 86 80 127 79
23.1 21.5 34.1 21.2
781 863 1,645 1,085
17.9 19.7 37.6 24.8
315 57
84.7 15.3
3,726 648
85.2 14.8
0.07
4.39* 82 290
22.0 78.0
1,183 3,191
27.0 73.0 47.64***
43 45 284
11.6 12.1 76.3
170 514 3,690
3.9 11.8 84.4 200.48***
132 46 16 55 26 58 39
35.5 12.4 4.3 14.8 7.0 15.6 10.5
530 277 226 882 911 856 692
12.1 6.3 5.2 20.2 20.8 19.6 15.8 4.82*
183 189
49.2 50.8
2,410 1,964
55.1 44.9 108.36***
283 89
76.1 23.9
2,098 2,276
48.0 52.0 100.86***
115 257
30.9 69.1
Journal of Traumatic Stress DOI 10.1002/jts. Published on behalf of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies.
536 3838
12.3 87.7 (Continued)
367
Mobilizing Victim Services: The Role of Police
Table 1 Continued
examined interactions between the primary factor of interest, reported to the police, and incident characteristics. There were no substantive differences in results using survey weights and the unweighted sample; therefore, all analyses were conducted using the unweighted sample.
Used service Yes
No
(n = 372)
(n = 4,374)
Variable
n or M
% or SD
n or M
% or SD
Family problem Yes No Agea Household sizea Mental distressa Physical distressa
129 243 35.0 2.3 4.1 2.5
34.7 65.3 14.2 1.4 3.0 2.6
722 3652 34.6 2.4 2.1 0.9
76.92*** 16.5 83.5 16.16 −0.53 1.2 1.52 2.7 −12.07*** 1.9 −11.46***
Results χ2 or t
Note. Mean values and t test results presented. Levene’s test for equality of variances was significant, indicating that equal variances cannot be assumed. a For continuous variables 372 subjects used services and 4,374 subjects did not use services. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Measures The dependent variable, victim service help seeking, was measured by the question “Did you (or someone in your household) receive any help or advice from any office or agency—other than the police—that deals with victims of crime?” Independent measures included demographic indicators, incident characteristics, and different types of problems victims experienced after being victimized including job and family problems, and mental and physical health issues. Job and family problems were measured through dichotomous variables. Mental health problems included being worried or anxious, angry, sad or depressed, vulnerable, violated, mistrustful, unsafe, or otherwise impacted. The items in mental health were combined into a scale from 0 to 8 (α = .94). Physical health problems included headaches, trouble sleeping, changes in eating or drinking, an upset stomach, fatigue, high blood pressure, muscle tension, or some other problem. The scale ranged from 0 to 8 (α = .89). Data Analysis Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze the impact of police contact on seeking victim services. Analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics 19. First, sample characteristics were examined with respect to seeking services. Chi-square and t tests were conducted with respect to significant differences between victims who did and did not use victim services. Next, multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze the relative impact of victim demographic characteristics, incident characteristics, and victim distress on using victim services. Of particular interest was the effect of reporting to the police on mobilizing victim services. Subsequent analyses
Table 1 shows the relationship between demographic and victimization characteristics by use of service. Use of victim services was significantly different by sex, household income, marital status, the type of harm experienced, victim–offender relationship, the presence of a bystander, if the incident was reported to the police, and among variables for victims who had job and family problems, and by the level of mental and physical distress. Temporal changes in service use between 2008 and 2011 were examined, but there were no significant differences in service mobilization. In light of the lack of variation by year, the analyses were treated as cross sectional. No substantive outliers were discovered. Although there were significant correlations between mental and physical distress (r = .71, p < .001), additional diagnostics revealed that there were no multicollinearity problems in the models (variance inflation factor < 5). Table 2 displays the results of the logistic regression analyzing the impact of victim and incident characteristics on victim service mobilization. Predictors of service usage included female victim, sexual assault victim, reported to the police, and several categories of victim offender relationship: intimate, family, acquaintance, unknown relationship, and more than one offender. Victims who had job problems and physical distress were more likely to contact victim services. Subsequent analyses (Table 2) examined interactions between reporting and incident characteristics in exploring differences in the impact of reporting on help seeking. Interactions were explored with all incident characteristics; however, only relationship factors were significant and improved the model fit. Results indicated that victims who were harmed by intimate partners and family had the greatest gain in service usage from calling the police. Victims harmed by an acquaintance had modest gains in the odds of seeking services. Calling the police did not significantly increase the odds of services utilization for friends, relationship unknown, and multiple offenders. Discussion Although service providers address and treat traumatic stress resulting from criminal victimization, very few victims actually have contact with these services. Victim services were more likely to be utilized when the incident was known to the police, the victim was female, and the relationship involved greater intimacy. This confirms prior research (Langton, 2011; Sims et al., 2005). Victims of intimate and family violence received the greatest benefit from reporting relative to other relationship categories as shown in the interaction
Journal of Traumatic Stress DOI 10.1002/jts. Published on behalf of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies.
368
Zaykowski
Table 2 Logistic Regression Analyses for Mobilizing Victim Services Base model Variable Female Race/ethnicity Black Hispanic Other/mixed race Income < $15,000 $15,000–$34,999 Missing Urban Married Type of victimization Sexual assault Robbery Offender status Intimate Family Friend Acquaintance More than 1 Not known Bystander Reported to police Job problem Family problem Age Household size Mental distress Physical distress Interactions Reported × intimate Reported × family Reported × friend Reported × acquaintance Reported × more than 1 Reported × not known Constant
Interactions model
OR
95% CI
OR
95% CI
1.67***
[1.27, 2.19]
1.68**
[1.28, 2.20]
1.11 1.10 1.02
[0.81, 1.53] [0.78, 1.56] [0.64, 1.64]
1.12 1.09 1.04
[0.81, 1.54] [0.77, 1.55] [0.64, 1.67]
0.89 0.88 0.67* 1.04 0.88
[0.64,1.23] [0.64, 1.21] [0.49, 0.93] [0.75, 1.44] [0.65, 1.18]
0.89 0.87 0.67* 1.05 0.87
[0.64, 1.25] [0.63, 1.20] [0.48, 0.92] [0.76, 1.45] [0.65, 1.18]
2.39*** 0.98
[1.59, 3.59] [0.69, 1.41]
2.40*** 1.03
[1.59, 3.62] [0.72, 1.48]
4.52*** 3.94*** 1.80 1.93** 1.76* 1.91* 0.95 3.01*** 1.66*** 0.92 1.00 0.99 1.03 1.17***
[2.82, 7.23] [2.30, 6.76] [0.91, 3.55] [1.18, 3.17] [1.08, 2.88] [1.13, 3.22] [0.75, 1.21] [2.32, 3.91] [1.23, 2.24] [0.68, 1.24] [0.99, 1.00] [0.89, 1.09] [0.97, 1.09] [1.09, 1.25]
1.64 0.78 1.27 1.06 1.26 1.07 0.94 1.06 1.65*** 0.92 1.00 0.99 1.03 1.17***
[0.78, 3.44] [0.22, 2.83] [0.50, 3.25] [0.51, 2.20] [0.58, 2.75] [0.46, 2.50] [0.73, 1.20] [0.48, 2.33] [1.22, 2.23] [0.68, 1.24] [0.99, 1.00] [0.89, 1.09] [0.97, 1.10] [1.09, 1.25]
4.58** 8.90** 1.62 2.69 1.91 2.63 0.01***
[1.79, 11.74] [2.10, 37.79] [0.43, 6.08] [1.01, 7.21] [0.70, 5.24] [0.89, 7.80]
0.01***
Note. N = 4,746. The references categories are white for race/ethnicity, income $35,000 and over for household income, physical assault for type of crime, and stranger for victim-offender relationship. The base model −2 log likelihood = 2195.94 and Nagelkerke R2 = .20. The interaction model −2 log likelihood = 2178.72 and Nagelkerke R2 = .21. OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
models. This finding may be due to several factors including police discretion and knowledge of services, services available, and unmeasured barriers to services. Police may perceive service agencies to be more appropriate than themselves to handle victims’ needs and that such services can better address victim trauma. Of greater concern, however, is that police may perceive some victims to be more worthy
than others (Sims et al., 2005). Victim service mobilization may also be impacted by the type of services that are available and perceived eligibility. Some victims may not be eligible for publically funded services, which are limited by statutory definitions. For example, victims who had contributed to the crime are often excluded from services (Trulson, 2005). Finally, agencies may want to consider providing or linking victims
Journal of Traumatic Stress DOI 10.1002/jts. Published on behalf of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies.
Mobilizing Victim Services: The Role of Police
to wrap-around services that address unemployment, medical issues, and other consequences of trauma. Although this study provides some key insights into understanding factors associated with seeking victim services, there are several limitations and important questions that remain. Police contact was an important predictor of mobilizing services, but additional research is needed to understand police discretion as a mechanism connecting victims to services. It is also possible that victims may not seek services because they do not view their own experiences as crimes or serious enough to consider victim services, or do not know of services that may be available to them. This study was unable to explore questions along this line of inquiry using the NCVS, but I believe that these would be fruitful areas for additional research. References
369
Langton, L. (2011). Use of victim service agencies by victims of serious violent crime, 1993–2009. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/uvsavsvc9309.pdf McCart, M. R., Smith, D. W., & Sawyer, G. K. (2010). Help seeking among victims of crime: A review of the empirical literature. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 23, 198–206. doi:10.1002/jts.20509 New, M., & Berliner, L. (2000). Mental health service utilization by victims of crime. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 13, 693–707. Sims, B., Yost, B., & Abbott, C. (2005). Use and nonuse of victim service programs: Implications from a statewide survey of crime victims. Criminology and Public Policy, 4, 361–384. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2005.00026.x Trulson, C. R. (2005). Victims’ rights and services: Eligibility, exclusion, and victim worth. Criminology and Public Policy, 4, 399–414. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2005.00029.x
Kaukinen, C. E., Meyer, S., & Akers, C. (2013). Status compatibility and helpseeking behaviors among female intimate partner violence victims. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28, 577–601. doi:10.1177/0886260512455516
U.S. Department of Justice. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2013). National Crime Victimization Survey, 2008–2011. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR). Retrieved from http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NACJD/series/95
Kilpatrick, D. G., & Acierno, R. (2003). Mental health needs of crime victims: Epidemiology and outcomes. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 16, 119–132. doi:10.1023/A:1022891005388
U.S. Department of Justice. Office for Victims of Crime (2012). Rising to the challenge: A new era in victim services. Retrieved from http://www.ovc.gov/pubs/reporttonation2011/ReporttoNation2011.pdf
Journal of Traumatic Stress DOI 10.1002/jts. Published on behalf of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies.
