Media,Gender,and Fear of Crime

Abstract

Few studies have examined how the intersection of gender and race/ethnicity may manifest differences in the effects of crime-related media on fear of crime. This study examines the relationships between various forms of crime-related media on fear of crime with a sample disaggregated by gender to ascertain if crime-related media consumption works differently for women and men. Race/ethnic differences within gender were also examined. Only slight differences between men and women were found and differences across race/ethnicity within gender groups were minor. Therefore, despite the prevalence of White female victims in crime-related media, media messages of risk, and fear seem to influence viewers similarly regardless of gender or race, providing additional support for cultivation theory and mainstreaming effects.

Keywords

social constructions of crime/justice crime/delinquency theory gender and crime/justice other race and crime/justice

Introduction

One of the most consistent findings in the large body of literature on fear of crime is that women express significantly higher levels of fear in comparison to men (Akers, La Greca, Sellers, & Cochran, 1987; Ferraro, 1995; Hale, 1996; Warr, 1984). Some have attributed this gender gap to women’s heightened sense of vulnerability to sexual assault, which is significantly more likely to occur to a woman than to a man (Ferraro, 1996; Pain, 2001; Stanko, 1992). Many have argued that this fear spills over to fear of other person crimes that have the potential to lead to sexual assault, such as a robbery leading to rape (Ferraro, 1996; Fisher & Sloan, 2003; Warr, 1987). Researchers have also suggested that women feel much less capable than men of defending themselves if physically attacked, which could lead to greater fear and anxiety about the potential for criminal victimization and its consequences (Parker & Ray, 1990; Riger, Gordon, & Le Bailley, 1978).

Feminist criminologists argue that gender is socially constructed. As such, gender differences in perceptions of and reactions to crime are due to gender differences in child and adult socialization. Girls and boys learn that to be masculine is to be physically strong and aggressive, and to be feminine is to be physically weak and submissive. These ideas underpin the social construction of crime roles insofar that males are typically thought of as perpetrators and females as victims (Goodey, 1997; Hollander, 2001; Stanko, 1992). These gendered ideas of crime are also reinforced by mass media depictions in which crime perpetrators are disproportionately male and victims are disproportionately female (Chermak, 1995), especially of sexual assault and/or murder committed by a stranger (Britto, Hughes, Saltzman, & Stroh, 2007). That being said, few studies have examined if women’s consumption of crime-related media has greater influence on their fear of crime than it does for men.

A handful of qualitative studies have explored the impact of media on women’s fear of crime (e.g., Gilchrist, Bannister, Ditton, & Farrall, 1998; Madriz, 1997) but relatively little quantitative research has examined the effects of media consumption on fear of crime across disaggregated subsamples of men and women. Instead, most studies include gender as a control variable, which does not illuminate the process by which the effects of crime-related media might vary by gender. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationships between various forms of crime-related media on a sample disaggregated by gender to ascertain if crime-related media consumption works differently for men and women in producing perceptions of crime risk and fear of crime. This approach is justified by media reception research that posits audience characteristics such as gender and age moderate the influence of media messages (e.g., Morgan & Shanahan, 1997; Shrum & Bischak, 2001).

Correlates of Fear of Crime

A sizable body of research has established that many other demographic factors besides gender are correlated with fear of crime. Studies consistently find that the poor and people of color have higher levels of fear of crime than those with higher income and Whites (Ferraro, 1995; Garofalo, 1981; Parker & Ray, 1990; Taylor & Hale, 1986). Additionally, both married individuals and highly educated people express less fear in comparison to singles and less educated people (Baumer, 1978; Schafer, Huebner, & Bynum, 2006). Many of these relationships are explained by lifestyles and/or the conditions in which residents live. For example, the relationship between income and fear may be due to differences in residential neighborhood conditions, in that poorer neighborhoods have more signs of social disorganization such as abandoned cars and graffiti that signal criminal danger, as well as greater residential instability, which also appears to elevate fear (Skogan, 1990, 1993). Research also suggests that individual’s perceptions of crime and disorder in an environment have greater impact on their fear of crime than actual crime rates (Schafer et al., 2006). Of relevance, these perceptions may be intensified with information about crime obtained from mass media as well as family, neighbors, and others (Gilchrist et al., 1998).

Social and physical vulnerability is also correlated with fear of crime. For example, social vulnerability, sometimes measured as living alone, has been found to elevate fear of crime, whereas those with close social ties in their neighborhood experience lower levels of fear than those without such ties (Silverman & Kennedy, 1985). Physical vulnerability has also been found to elevate fear of crime. Building off of the work of Skogan and Maxfield (1981), Killias and Clerici (2000) found that self-assessed vulnerability—that is, the perceived inability to successfully fight off an assailant—was highly correlated with fear of crime. Finally, Warr (1984) and others (Fisher & Sloan, 2003; Gilchrist et al., 1998; Hughes, Marshall, & Sherrill, 2003) have argued that aging leads to increased vulnerability and ultimately higher levels of fear even though many studies have found that older people exhibit lower levels of fear (LaGrange & Ferraro, 1989; Scheider, Rowell, & Bezdikian, 2003). Additional research on the topic argues that the relationship between age and fear is dependent upon socioeconomic status (SES), with older people living in poverty experiencing greater fear (Pantazis, 2000).

Experiences with crime, both direct and indirect, have also been found to be correlated with fear of crime. Earlier studies found that crime victims had higher fear of crime (e.g., Garofalo, 1977), but subsequent research has produced mixed results (Ferraro, 1996; Gomme, 1988; Scott, 2003; Weinrath & Gartrell, 1996). Studies that have disaggregated their samples by gender suggest that women’s fear is largely driven by their fear of sexual assault (Ferraro, 1996; Reid & Konrad, 2004), as well other person crimes that have the potential to turn into sexual assault (Warr, 1987).

Studies have also found gender differences in the sociodemographic correlates of fear of crime. For example, men’s fear appears to increase with age, whereas women’s fear decreases or is unaffected by age (Franklin & Franklin, 2009; Schafer et al., 2006; Smith & Torstensson, 1997). However, studies are mixed with respect to gender differentials in the effects of income, education, and race/ethnicity on fear of crime. Some have found that income (Schafer et al., 2006) and education (Smith & Torstensson, 1997) were negatively correlated with men’s fear of crime, but these indicators of SES had no influence on women’s fear. In contrast, Franklin and Franklin (2009) found that income was positively correlated with men’s fear of crime, but negatively correlated with women’s, and education had no effect on either gender.

Gender, Media, and Fear of Crime

Gender is the most significant demographic correlate of fear of crime, with women consistently reporting higher levels of fear than men (Akers et al., 1987; Ferraro, 1995; Hale, 1996; Haynie, 1998; Madriz, 1997; Stanko, 1992; Warr, 1984). This is true despite the fact that women are significantly less likely than men to be violently victimized (with the exception of sexual victimization). This “gender-fear paradox” has often been attributed to women’s heightened sense of physical vulnerability (Fisher & Sloan, 2003; Gilchrist et al., 1998; Hughes et al., 2003; Schafer et al., 2006; Stanko, 1992), but even studies that control for vulnerability find that women’s fear of crime remains higher than men’s (Killias & Clerici, 2000; Schafer et al., 2006).

Perhaps the most popular explanation for women’s fear is what Warr (1984) calls the “shadow hypothesis” or the idea that women’s fear stems from the overriding threat of sexual victimization. Even when considering fear of crime unrelated to sexual victimization, women may have elevated levels of fear because the risk of sexual victimization is omnipresent (Ferraro, 1996; Warr, 1984).

We posit that women may have higher fear of crime because they overestimate their chances of victimization. Literature suggests that women are most commonly depicted as victims of crime in the media (Bjornstrom, Kaufman, Peterson, & Slater, 2010; Chermak, 1995; Paulsen, 2003; Peelo, Francis, Pearson, & Soothill, 2004; Prichard & Hughes, 1997; Weiss & Chermak, 1998), and that even news stories based on actual events give preference to female victims, even though violent victimization rates are ten times higher for men than they are for women. Thus, information about crime from the media may have significantly more effect on female consumers compared to men. Moreover, the portrayal of female victims in the media mirrors the gendered stereotype of women as victims, thus reinforcing these cultural stereotypes.

Media and Fear of Crime

Media effects research accelerated in the 1970s with the introduction of “cultivation analysis” by George Gerbner and colleagues at the Annenberg School of Communication, which argued that heavy television consumption cultivates a worldview that is closer to the world as depicted on television than actual reality (Gerbner & Gross, 1976; Gerbner et al., 1977). Because American television is saturated with violence, cultivation theorists hypothesized heavy television viewers would develop the belief that strangers were not to be trusted and develop higher fear of crime than those who did not view as much television. Initial empirical tests confirmed the cultivation hypothesis (Gerbner et al., 1977), but these studies were criticized for failing to control for other factors associated with fear of crime (e.g., Hirsch, 1980, 1981). Subsequent studies began to control for sociodemographic characteristics and lifestyle factors. These studies produced mixed results, but suggest variability in the effects of television consumption on fear by sociodemographic and experiential factors (e.g., Chiricos, Eschholz, & Gertz, 1997; Doob & MacDonald, 1979; Gerbner, Morgan & Signorielli, 1980).

Much of the research on group differences has focused on personal experiences with crime. These studies suggest personal experience with crime moderates media effects in one of two ways (Chiricos, Padgett, & Gertz, 2000; Gerbner et al., 1980). The substitution thesis suggests that individuals with little or no personal experience with crime will use media as a substitute for their lack of experience, thus, establishing opinions of crime from media representations (Gerbner et al., 1980). This line of reasoning is especially relevant to the study of gender and fear of crime because it helps researchers explain the paradox that “persons who have the lowest victimization rates (such as women and the elderly) express the greatest fear of crime” (Warr & Stafford, 1983; cf. Weitzer & Kubrin, 2004, p. 43). Alternatively, the resonance thesis suggests if viewers have personal experiences with crime, media representations will “resonate” with their own experiences, which will reinforce existing opinions and reactions to crime (Gerbner et al., 1980). Chiricos, Eschholz, and Gertz (1997) extended these arguments by suggesting that fear is also elevated among viewers when those who are portrayed as crime victims are demographically similar to the viewer; what they term the “affinity hypothesis.” Since numerous studies have documented that women are disproportionately depicted as crime victims, especially of sexual assault, and other violent crimes, it could be argued that women are more likely to have an affinity with these victim portrayals, which then elevates their fear of crime.

In addition to audience characteristics, the type of crime-related media consumed also appears to matter. Of the few studies that have examined multiple forms of media in their analyses, most find that television news and crime-reality programs have more influence on fear of crime than do television crime dramas (e.g., Chiricos et al., 1997; Weitzer & Kubrin, 2004), but some studies have found a positive relationship between viewing crime dramas and fear of crime (e.g., Eschholz, Chiricos, & Gertz, 2003). This has been attributed to the content and framing of information about crime in these genres. From the possible crime events to report, only a few make the news, and these are often very heinous, violent types of crime (Peelo et al., 2004; Johnstone, Darnell, & Arthur, 1994). Moreover, violent events are more often to be covered by news organizations when they involve White female victims (Prichard & Hughes, 1997; Weiss & Chermak, 1998). White females are more likely than any other group to be depicted as victims of violent crime in television news (Chermak, 1995); however, they are least likely to be victimized. White females are also disproportionally portrayed as victims in crime dramas and crime-reality programs (e.g., Britto et al., 2007; Chermak, 1995). A content analysis of the television series Law and Order, for example, found that 60% of the victims of violent crime were White women (Britto et al., 2007). These media images are so pervasive that Madriz (1997) found that the majority of women she interviewed (irrespective of race/ethnicity) described the average victim as a White middle-class woman.

Given the gender differences in actual criminal victimization as well as media portrayals of crime victims, media effects research should compare how the processes of media consumption works across gender. Important media influences may work differently across gender, an idea supported in a recent study (May, Rader, & Goodrum, 2010). However, most studies on media’s influence on fear of crime many have treated gender as a control variable, which consistently demonstrate that women’s fear of crime is significantly higher than men’s. But these types of analyses cannot address if crime-related media have variable effects on fear of crime by gender.

The few studies that have disaggregated their samples by gender have produced mixed results. For example, Chiricos et al. (1997) found that television news consumption elevated fear of crime among women, but not among men. Lane and Meeker (2003) found that women’s fear of gang-related crime was much higher than that of men’s and appeared to be influenced by newspapers and local television news. In contrast, Weitzer and Kubrin (2004) did not find any interaction effects with gender and consumption of several sources of news (i.e., newspapers, radio, local and national news, and the Internet) on fear of crime.

This study adds to the literature on gender and fear of crime by disaggregating the sample by gender. Additionally, we will compare fear of crime among women across race/ethnicity to test the “affinity” hypothesis, that viewers with similar sociodemographic characteristics to victims portrayed in crime-related media will be more impacted by media consumption than individuals whose demographic group is seldom portrayed as crime victims (Eschholz, 1997). Since crime-related media disproportionately features White female victims (Chermak, 1995; Entman, 1990; Prichard & Hughes, 1997; Weiss & Chermak, 1998) White females should have higher levels of perceived risk and fear of crime than women of color.

Conceptualization and Measurement of Fear of Crime

Fear of crime studies has been widely critiqued for their inconsistent, imprecise, and invalid concepts and measurement. LaGrange and Ferraro (1989) identified two main issues. The first is that past measures do not truly measure “fear,” and the second is that they do not measure it well. With respect to the second issue, earlier studies relied on single-item indicators of fear; however, the questions used (such as those in the General Social Survey [GSS]) or the National Crime Survey implied fear of criminal victimization but did not state it directly. For example, the question in the GSS asks respondents “Is there any place right around here—that is, within a mile—where you would be afraid to walk alone at night?” LaGrange and Ferraro (1989) argued that this type of question is flawed for several reasons, including that fear of crime is implied but not stated, it is a single indicator and more prone to measurement error, and it does not measure specific fear-inducing types of crimes, which are apt to vary. Feminist criminologists have also critiqued these measures because “respectable” women just do not walk alone at night, so women are asked to assess something they never do (Stanko, 1995).

With respect to the first issue, earlier studies often assessed respondent’s fear of crime by asking about their estimated risk of being victimized (LaGrange & Ferraro, 1989). Although this is useful information, it does not measure actual fear and anxiety about the potential of criminal victimization. Ferraro and LaGrange (1987) were among the first to identify these problems and suggest that future studies draw distinctions between the two dimensions; subsequent studies have distinguished between fear of crime and perceived risk of crime (see Eschholz et al., 2003; Ferraro, 1995, 1996). More recent studies have used perceived risk as a moderating factor of fear of crime (Heath, Kavanagh, & Thompson, 2001; Reid & Konrad, 2004), but more commonly, perceived risk is left out of fear of crime models altogether.

Although the body of research looking specifically at perceived risk of criminal victimization is significantly smaller than the fear of crime literature, it has untangled some of the relationships between perceived risk and fear of crime. Researchers have suggested age, income, prior victimization, and media representations may affect fear of crime indirectly by elevating perceptions of perceived risk and vulnerability. For example, a frequent finding is that gender differences in fear diminish with age, which has commonly been explained by the increase in perceived risk of victimization and physical vulnerability among older men (Heath et al., 2001). Additionally, fear of crime is negatively correlated with income, but this may be a result of higher perceived risk given that low-income areas usually experience higher levels of crime than high-income neighborhoods (Baumer, 1985). Personal victimization or victimization of family or friends may raise fear of crime through perceived risk because of the proximity of the crime and the concern they have for loved ones (Warr & Ellison, 2000). Less is known about media effects on perceived risk, but consumption of certain media forms, such as local television news, appears to raise fear of crime by elevating perceptions of risk (Callanan, 2012).

In this study, perceived risk will be used as a predictor of fear. This is an important part of our argument, because crime-related media consumption may have little or no direct relationship to fear, but instead, indirectly elevate it through perceived risk of victimization. Additionally, we argue that media misrepresentations about victims may lead female viewers to have an “affinity” with the media victims and subsequently overestimate their neighborhood risk of criminal victimization, thus leading to higher fear of crime.

Hypotheses

The purpose of this study is to examine gender differences in the effect of crime-related media consumption on perceptions of neighborhood crime risk and fear of crime. The literature on fear of crime has found media to disproportionally raise women’s fear of crime (Eschholz et al., 2003), and research in this area suggests that television news may be the most influential form of crime-related media (Chiricos et al., 1997; O’Keefe & Reid-Nash, 1987; Romer, Jamieson, & Aday, 2003, but see Grabe & Drew, 2007). Given the disproportionate representations of men as offenders and women as victims in crime-related media, we hypothesize that consumption of said media will increase women’s fear more than men’s fear. This study will run separate analytical models by sex, which will allow us to determine if crime-related media have different effects on men and women’s fear of crime. Additionally, comparisons across race/ethnicity within gender groups will allow us to ascertain if media consumption elevates White women’s fear more so than that of women of color, as the affinity hypothesis suggests.

Hypothesis 1: Consumption of crime-related media will disproportionally raise fear of crime for women compared to men. Media representations are loaded with gender messages that socialize viewers to see criminals as masculine and victims as feminine.

Hypothesis 2: Consumption of crime-related media will disproportionately raise perception of neighborhood crime for women compared to men. Since stories about female victims of “stranger danger” are more apt to be covered by the news media in general, local coverage is apt to increase women’s perception of criminal victimization more than men’s.

Hypothesis 3: Since White women are disproportionately presented as crime victims in both television news and newspapers, White women that consume these media will have greater fear of crime than women of color who consume these media.

Data and Methods

Data for this project are drawn from a California household survey of 4,245 adults 18 and older who were interviewed in 1999 by a computer-assisted telephone interviewing system. The survey asked respondents approximately 100 questions related to perceived risk of victimization, fear of crime, media consumption, and the criminal justice system. To allow for meaningful comparisons across race/ethnicity, African Americans and certain geographical regions were oversampled including San Bernardino, Riverside, and San Diego County, and the Central Valley region.¹ The surveys averaged 35–40 min and interviews were administered in English, and when necessary, Spanish; the response rate was 69.9%.² No incentives were used to encourage participation. The majority of the sample (57%) is comprised of women, as they are typically more likely to answer the phone.

Intervening and Dependent Variables

Perceived risk of neighborhood crime was measured using a 6-item scale that asked respondents to assess the likelihood of various types of victimization in their neighborhood. These included burglary of a residence when occupants were in the home, and while they were away, assault, auto theft, robbery, and vandalism. Responses ranged from 0 to 10 where 0 equaled not likely at all, and 10, very likely. The answers were combined and then divided by six to reflect the original metric (α = .924).³ As seen in Table 1, the mean of perceived neighborhood crime risk for the whole sample is 3.81 but women perceived significantly more crime risk in their neighborhoods than men (3.99 vs. 3.57, respectively).

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics.

Variables	Range	All samples	Females (n = 2,454)	Males (n = 1,791)	T-test	Description
Variables	Range	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)	T-test	Description
Dependent variables
Perceived risk	0–10	3.81 (2.51)	3.99 (2.62)	3.57 (2.34)	4.93***	Perception of neighborhood crime (6-item scale)
Fear	0–10	3.52 (2.45)	3.85 (2.60)	3.09 (2.20)	9.93***	Fear of crime (7-item scale)∑
Media variables
TV crime reality	1–5	1.91 (.96)	1.87 (.95)	1.91 (.94)	−1.31	Crime-reality programs (4-item scale)
TV crime dramas	1–5	1.89 (1.06)	1.92 (1.07)	1.82 (1.02)	2.99**	Crime dramas (4-item scale)
Newspaper	0–7	3.64 (2.96)	3.43 (3.00)	3.91 (2.93)	−5.17*	Days per week read the newspaper
TV news	0–7	5.04 (2.44)	9.54 (4.57)	8.91 (4.69)	5.07***	Days per week view local TV news
Total hours of TV	0–97	17.49 (14.16)	17.77 (14.96)	17.02 (13.09)	1.70***	Total hours of TV per week (any programs)
Experience variables
Victimization	0–2	.58 (.71)	0.53 (.69)	0.60 (.72)	−3.24*	Respondent or family a victim in prior 3 years
Control variables
Age	17–94	44.35 (16.43)	45.87 (17.45)	44.66 (16.43)	2.27**
Gender	0–1	.43 (.49)	—	—	—
Black	0–1	.11 (.31)	0.11 (.31)	0.10 (.31)	.12
Latino	0–1	.19 (.39)	0.19 (.39)	0.17 (.38)	1.47**
Asian	0–1	.08 (.27)	0.06 (.25)	0.09 (.29)	−3.06***
Education	1–5	3.16 (1.09)	3.05 (1.11)	3.26 (1.11)	−5.86**
Income	1–9	5.92 (2.02)	5.66 (2.01)	6.17 (1.95)	−7.56***
Lives alone	0–1	.15 (.36)	0.17 (.38)	0.18 (.39)	−.87
Lives in house	0–1	.58 (.71)	0.70 (.46)	0.69 (.46)	.285

*p ≤ .05; **p ≤ .01; ***p ≤ .001.

After assessing the likelihood of neighborhood crime, respondents were asked how fearful they were of seven types of crime on a scale of zero to ten in which zero represented “not at all fearful” and ten represented “extremely fearful.” The 7 items were burglary of their home while they were away and while they were at home, assault, auto theft, robbery, vandalism, and fear for their children or partner being victimized. Although fear of sexual assault was asked in the original survey, this item was not included in the scale because it would inflate women’s fear of crime relative to men (Callanan & Teasdale, 2009). As with the perception of neighborhood crime risk, the scale was computed to reflect the original metric (α = .914). As seen in Table 1, fear of crime averages 3.52 for the entire sample with significant differences in means of fear of crime between women (3.85) and men (3.09).

Media Variables

Respondents were asked about their consumption of various crime-related media: television crime-reality shows, television crime dramas, newspapers, local television news, and all television (irrespective of genre). The crime drama scale summated frequency of viewing three television programs—Law and Order, Homicide, and NYPD Blue; each was measured with four categories ranging from “never” to “every week.” A crime-reality scale with the same categories was created by summing the frequency of viewing Cops, American Justice, America’s Most Wanted, and Justice Files.⁴ The crime drama scale had a mean of 1.89 and a Cronbach’s α of .690; the mean of the crime-reality scale was 1.91 with an α of 0.724. Both newspaper readership and local television news consumption was measured by the number of days per week spent viewing/reading these media. On average, respondents read the newspaper 3.64 days per week, and watched local television news 4.61 days. Respondents were also asked to estimate the number of hours per week they watched television, with the average viewer spending about 18 hr a week viewing television.⁵

Sociodemographic and Experiential Variables

Past criminal victimization was created from summing two questions that asked if the respondent had been a crime victim and if a member of their family had been victimized in the three years prior to the survey administration. The index ranges from 0 (no criminal victimization) to 2 (both the respondent and a member of their family had been victimized). As seen in Table 1, the mean of 0.58 suggested relatively low levels of victimization for the entire sample, and women’s level of victimization (.53) was lower than men’s (.60). Social vulnerability was measured with two dichotomous variables, living alone (coded as 1) and living in a house (coded as 1). Fifteen percent of respondents lived alone and 58% lived in a house; there were no gender differences in these measures of social vulnerability.

Sociodemographic controls include age, race, income, and education (see Table 1). Age was measured continuously; the mean age was 44.35. Over 60% of the respondents were White, 11% were Black, 19% were Latino, 8% were Asian and 3% were from other race/ethnicities. Race/ethnicity was coded into dummy variables of White, Black, Latino, Asian, and Other. Whites and “others” comprised the omitted variable in the full models. Education and income were both categorical variables; the median level of education was “some college or trade school” and the median annual household income was between US$35,000 and US$50,000.

T-tests were run on the sample to determine if men and women significantly varied across any of the control variables. Women in the sample were older, had less education, had lower household incomes, and were less likely to have been a victim of a crime than men. There were also more Asian male respondents than females. Of the media variables, women watched significantly more types of television with the exception of crime-reality, which did not differ by gender. Men, on the other hand, were more likely to read the newspaper.

Method

The effects of media on perception of criminal victimization risk and fear of were examined using ordinary least squares (OLS) regression.⁶ The models were first run with the full sample, and then disaggregated by gender so comparisons could be made between men and women. Comparing across separate female and male samples, this study provides an examination of the specific processes in which gender moderates the influence of crime-related media consumption on perceptions of and fear of crime. Further, by comparing across race/ethnicity, we are also able to ascertain if the intersection of gender and race/ethnicity is important to audience interpretation of crime-related media. Z-tests were conducted to determine if the regression coefficients significantly differed across gender and, within gender, across race/ethnicity. While there are different formulas used to conduct z-tests, this study uses the method described by Paternoster, Brame, Mazerolle, and Piquero (1998),⁷ which is the most conservative, and therefore, stringent test.

Results

Table 2 presents the results of crime-related media on perceived neighborhood crime risk for the whole sample and separately by gender. As expected, women perceived more neighborhood crime risk than men, net of other factors. African Americans and Latinos perceived significantly more neighborhood crime risk than Whites but Asians perceived less crime risk than Whites. Education, income, and living in a house were negatively associated with perceived neighborhood crime risk. Respondents with criminal victimization in the three years prior to the survey also had higher levels of perceived neighborhood crime risk; this was the strongest predictor of perceived neighborhood crime risk. Of relevance, this was the only factor that varied by gender. Specifically, women who were criminally victimized (or who had family members that were) had much higher perceptions of neighborhood crime risk compared to men that were criminally victimized.

Table 2.

OLS Coefficients and Standard Errors of Predictors of Perception of Neighborhood Crime Risk by Gender.

	All respondents	Female respondents	Male respondents	Z-test (one-tailed)
	(n = 3,468)	(n = 1,976)	(n = 1,493)	Z-test (one-tailed)
Control variables
Age	−.004 (.003)	−.006 (.004)	−.002 (.004)	−.707
Gender	−.354*** (.082)	—	—	—
Black	.815*** (.135)	.979*** (.187)	.618** (.195)	1.336
Latino	.319** (.116)	.288* (.161)	.354* (.166)	−.285
Asian	−.445** (.155)	−.279 (.228)	−.630** (.207)	1.139
Education	−.140*** (.044)	−.203*** (.062)	−.077 (.061)	−1.449
Income∑	−.093*** (.024)	−.098** (.034)	−.075* (.034)	−.478
Live alone	.052 (.122)	.146 (.179)	−.005 (.163)	.624
House	−.560*** (.094)	−.482*** (.130)	−.654*** (.133)	.925
Experience variables
Victim	.866*** (.058)	.958*** (.081)	.766*** (.081)	1.676*
Media variables
Crime reality	.066 (.047)	.039 (.065)	.100 (.066)	−.658
Crime drama	.042 (.040)	.010 (.055)	.085 (.058)	−.938
Newspaper	.001 (.015)	.000 (.020)	.002 (.021)	−.069
TV local news	.071*** (.018)	.067** (.025)	.080*** (.025)	−.368
All TV	.002 (.003)	.004 (.004)	.001 (.005)	.469
Constant	4.268***	4.563***	3.539***
R ²	.130	.127	.130

Note. Standard errors in parentheses.

*p ≤ .05; **p ≤ .01; ***p ≤ .001.

With respect to media consumption, only local TV news influenced perception of neighborhood crime risk and this relationship was positively correlated. Of interest, there were no gender differences in the impact of local TV news on perception of crime risk.

Table 3 presents the OLS regression of fear of crime on media, controlling for perceived neighborhood crime risk. For the whole sample, as expected, women had higher fear of crime than men. In addition, Latinos and Asians had higher fear of crime than Whites, but African Americans did not. The vulnerability measures worked differently than what some literature suggests; age was negatively correlated with fear of crime and those who lived alone had lower fear than those who lived with others. However, finding that age is negatively correlated with fear of crime is supported in multiple studies (LaGrange & Ferraro, 1989; Scheider et al., 2003). Further, victimization research suggests that individuals are more likely to be victimized by someone that they know or possibly live with, which could explain why those who live alone experience lower levels of fear. Alternatively, research supports the idea that women fear “stranger danger” more than victimization by someone that they know (Scott, 2003). Both past criminal victimization and perceptions of neighborhood crime significantly increased fear of crime. Consumption of crime-reality television shows and local television news raised fear of crime.

Table 3.

OLS Coefficients and Standard Errors of Predictors of Fear of Crime by Gender.

	All respondents	Female respondents	Male respondents	Z-test (one-tailed)
	(n = 3,432)	(n = 1,954)	(n = 1,478)	Z-test (one-tailed)
Control variables
Age	−.008*** (.002)	−.012*** (.003)	−.003 (.003)	−2.121*
Gender	−.569*** (.065)	—	—	—
Black	−.166 (.108)	−.265 (.151)	−.059 (.151)	−.964
Latino	.888*** (.092)	.986*** (.129)	.729*** (.128)	1.414
Asian	1.101*** (.123)	.988*** (.183)	1.173*** (.161)	−.759
Education	−.072* (.035)	−.108* (.050)	−.033 (.047)	−1.093
Income	−.012 (.019)	−.023 (.027)	.005 (.027)	−.733
Live alone	−.269** (.097)	−.168 (.144)	−.357** (.128)	.981
House	.020 (.075)	−.103 (.105)	.160 (.104)	−1.779*
Experience variables
Victim	.240*** (.047)	.183** (.067)	.320*** (.065)	−1.467
Perceived Risk	.542*** (.014)	.561*** (.018)	.511*** (.020)	1.858*
Media variables
Crime reality	.100** (.037)	.046 (.052)	.164*** (.051)	−1.620
Crime drama	.023 (.032)	−.002 (.044)	.065 (.045)	−1.064
Newspaper	.016 (.012)	.042** (.016)	−.017 (.016)	2.607**
TV local news	.032* (.014)	.033 (.020)	.033 (.020)	.000
All TV	.002 (.002)	.001 (.003)	.002 (.004)	−.200
Constant	1.445***	1.901***	1.685***
R ²	.431	.423	.407

Note. OLS = ordinary least square. Standard errors in parentheses.

*p ≤ .05; **p ≤ .01; ***p ≤ .001.

Looking at fear of crime by gender, there were three factors with statistically significant variation between men and women. First, age was negatively correlated with women’s fear of crime, but had no impact on men’s. This differs from some prior research that finds women’s fear of crime remains at high, but relatively stable levels across age, whereas as men’s fear increases in their elderly years (Franklin & Franklin, 2009; Schafer et al., 2006). The finding that women’s fear of crime decreases with age, however, has been found (Smith & Torstensson, 1997). Moreover, since studies find that women fear “stranger danger” more than victimization by someone they know (Scott, 2003), it is likely the negative relationship between age and fear of crime among women in our study reflects the decreasing exposure to “dangerous others” that comes with lifestyle changes as one matures.

The second difference by gender is found in perceived neighborhood crime risk. Although perception of crime was positively correlated with fear of crime for both men and women, the effect was significantly larger for women. Third, reading newspapers increased women’s fear of crime but had no effect on men.

Table 4 compares the effects of race/ethnicity on perception of neighborhood crime risk among women in the sample to ascertain if support can be found for the affinity hypothesis. To restate, the affinity hypothesis suggests that the disproportionate portrayal of White female victims should have greater influence on White women because they are more likely to identify with these characters. Although no evidence of the affinity hypothesis was found for perception of neighborhood crime risk, there were differences among women by race/ethnicity that bear noting. African American women were significantly more likely to perceive neighborhood crime risk from watching local television news than Latinas or White women. However, compared to African American women, White women perceived more neighborhood crime from viewing crime-reality programs. Moreover, the more television viewed, irrespective of genre, the greater the perception of crime risk among White women, whereas total television consumption decreased perceptions of neighborhood crime risk among Black women.

Table 4.

OLS Coefficients and Standard Errors of Predictors of Perception of Neighborhood Crime Risk Among Women by Race/Ethnicity.

	Coefficients			Z-Test
	White	Black	Latino	White vs. Black	White vs. Latino	Black vs. Latino
	(n = 1,197)	(n = 213)	(n = 388)	White vs. Black	White vs. Latino	Black vs. Latino
Control variables
Age	−.010* (.005)	.005 (.012)	.013 (.012)	−1.154	−1.769*	−.471
Education	−.111 (.077)	−.235 (.201)	−.420** (.162)	.576	1.349	.717
Income	−.084* (.043)	−.203* (.098)	−.122 (.082)	1.112	.410	−.634
Live alone	.163 (.201)	.481 (.516)	−.500 (.816)	−.574	.789	1.016
House	−.453** (.166)	−.346 (.381)	−.649* (.309)	−.257	.559	.618
Experience variables
Victim	1.035*** (.099)	.825** (.271)	1.044*** (.200)	.728	−.040	−.650
Media variables
Crime reality	.165* (.084)	.028 (.205)	−.198 (.143)	.618	2.188*	.904
Crime drama	.036 (.067)	.301 (.160)	−.150 (.140)	−1.528	1.198	2.121*
Newspaper	.007 (.024)	−.020 (.062)	.015 (.054)	.406	−.135	−.426
TV local news	.039 (.030)	.262** (.095)	−.041 (.065)	−2.238*	1.117	2.632**
All TV	.013* (.005)	−.026** (.009)	.020 (.012)	3.788***	−.538	−3.067**
Constant	3.990***	4.598***	6.037***
R ²	.125	.135	.106

Note. OLS = ordinary least square. Standard errors in parentheses.

*p ≤ .05; **p ≤ .01; ***p ≤ .001.

Finally, Table 5 examines race/ethnic differences in fear of crime among women. A few differences were found. Consumption of crime-reality programs increased White women’s fears but had no impact on women of color. Consumption of crime dramas elevated Black women’s fear of crime, but lowered it for Whites and Latinas. Since White women are more likely to be portrayed as crime victims in both of these crime genres, it appears there is no evidence of affinity effects. However, the more that White women read the newspaper the more fearful they became whereas newspaper consumption had no effect on African American or Hispanic women.

Table 5.

OLS Coefficients and Standard Errors of Predictors of Fear of Crime Among Women by Race/Ethnicity.

	Coefficients			Z-Test
	White	Black	Latino	White vs. Black	White vs. Latino	Black vs. Latino
	(n = 1,185)	(n = 209)	(n = 383)	White vs. Black	White vs. Latino	Black vs. Latino
Control variables
Age	−.018*** (.004)	.001 (.011)	−.006 (.010)	−1.623	−1.114	.471
Education	−.039 (.057)	−.056 (.194)	−.438*** (.136)	.084	2.706**	1.612
Income	.003 (.032)	−.116 (.096)	−.053 (.068)	1.176	.745	−.536
Live alone	−.018 (.150)	−.519 (.501)	−.493 (.676)	.958	.686	−.031
House	−.228 (.124)	.009 (.367)	.200 (.259)	−.612	−1.490	−.425
Experience variables
Victim	.155* (.077)	.388 (.265)	.200 (.173)	−.844	−.238	.594
Perceived risk	.565*** (.022)	.414*** (.069)	.549*** (.043)	2.085*	.331	−1.660*
Media variables
Crime reality	.117 (.062)	−.230 (.195)	−.001 (.119)	1.696*	.879	−1.002
Crime drama	−.014 (.050)	.283 (.155)	−.177 (.116)	−1.824*	1.290	2.376**
Newspaper	.074*** (.018)	−.016 (.060)	−.030 (.045)	1.437	2.146*	.187
TV local news	.037 (.023)	.020 (.093)	.006 (.055)	.177	.519	.129
All TV	−.002 (.004)	.013 (.009)	.006 (.010)	−1.523	-.743	.520
Constant	1.771***	2.010***	4.204***
R ²	.440	.224	.383

Note. OLS = ordinary least square. Standard errors in parentheses.

*p ≤ .05; **p ≤ .01; ***p ≤ .001.

Finally, we compared race/ethnic differences in media effects on perceived risk and fear of crime among men (not shown). As noted earlier, consumption of television news increased perceptions of neighborhood crime risk among men, but there were no differences by race/ethnicity. Additionally, consumption of crime-reality shows increased fear of crime among men, but we found no difference across race/ethnicity.

Discussion

The only gender differences found in the effects of crime-related media on either perceptions of neighborhood crime risk or fear of crime was in newspaper consumption, which increased fear among women but had no impact on men’s fear. Therefore, the first hypothesis that posits crime-related media consumption will have greater impact on women’s fear of crime than men is only weakly supported with the data, since the effects of other crime-related media did not differ by gender.

There was no evidence to support the second hypothesis that the effects of crime-related media consumption on perceptions of crime risk would be stronger for women than men. Rather, television news consumption increased perceptions of neighborhood crime risk fairly equivalently among men and women. However, the impact of perceptions of neighborhood crime risk on fear of crime, as shown in Table 3, is significantly higher for women than for men. This indicates that a gender differential in the impact of television news consumption on fear of crime exists, but indirectly through perceptions of crime risk.

We found partial support for the third hypothesis that posited the effects of news consumption would be greater for White women than women of color. Specifically, the effects of newspaper consumption elevated fear of crime only among White women, the group most likely to be portrayed as victims in crime news. However, the effects of television news consumption on women’s fear of crime did not differ by race/ethnicity.

Prior research has found that the perceived realism of a media message is an important factor in individual’s cognitive processing of information about crime (e.g., Potter, 1986). Although the data did not include direct measures of this concept, the fact that consumption of television news, crime-reality shows, and newspaper reading increased perceptions of neighborhood crime risk and fear of crime but crime dramas did not, suggests that perceived realism is an underlying factor of crime-related media influence. Prior research has found that individuals perceive television news as more realistic than television crime dramas (Potter, 1986; Slater & Elliott, 1982), so it seems probable that respondents in our study shared this perception.

One unexpected finding was the variation in the effects of crime news forms among White female respondents. Since victims of crime in the media are disproportionately White females, we expected that White women’s fear of crime would increase with consumption of both television news and newspapers, but only newspaper consumption had this effect. Experimental research finds that those with higher education remember more information from newspapers than television news and they retain the information longer than those with lower education. In contrast, less educated individuals have better recall of television news but these memories erode more quickly (Grabe, Kamhawi, & Yegiyan, 2009). Since the White women in our sample had higher levels of education than women of color, newspaper crime stories may have had more influence on them than television crime news. Additionally, those who are more educated may be more inclined to believe what they read in the newspapers than what they view on local television news or crime-based reality shows. Consequently, perceived realism of the media source may be a more important factor for White women than it is for Latinas or Black women.

Television news had the greatest influence on elevating perceptions of neighborhood crime risk, irrespective of gender. This suggests that in addition to perceived realism, the content of the media messages and how that content is framed are important factors in elevating perceptions of neighborhood crime. Crimes on television news are often framed as highly probable random events likely to strike anyone at any time. The coverage is dramatic, often portraying the shock and grief of victims, and not much explanation is given for the crime event. This is of particular relevance when we consider that one-fifth to one-fourth of local television news broadcasts are comprised of crime topics, especially violent and unusual crimes (Surette, 2007). These highly dramatic, yet rare events may supersede gendered ideas about who is a victim, and relay the message to viewers that the world is a dangerous place for everyone.

Limitations of the Study and Future Research

There are several limitations to this study that impact the strength of our findings. First, because American society is so saturated with mass media, it is nearly impossible to find individuals who do not consume media. Since we lack a control group, it could be argued that the relationship between media consumption and perceptions of crime risk and fear of crime may only be statistically significant because of random variation. However, our findings are consistent with prior research in terms of size of coefficients and the direction of the relationships (Chiricos et al., 1997, 2000; Eschholz et al., 2003).

Second, it may be that men and women attend differently to crime-related media. Often television programs, advertisements, and news target different demographics despite being consumed by both parties. Consequently, other factors, such as viewer attentiveness (Grabe & Drew, 2007), program credibility, and perceived realism of the media content are important aspects that should be examined in future studies that examine media’s impact on fear of crime (Grabe & Drew, 2007; O’Keefe, 1984; Potter, 1986).

Third, there are a few issues related to the design and measures utilized in the study. Perceived risk was modeled as a predictor of fear of crime with separate OLS regressions to test this hypothesis. Structural Equation Modeling may provide a more accurate test of this relationship. Further, the measures used for crime-related media consumption may mask with-in variation in the content of the specific media forms and genres. For example, the manner in which the content is framed and visually presented may be more influential on fear of crime than the specific story that is being told. Although the advent of news media consultants has somewhat homogenized local television news coverage, at least in urban markets (Cooper, 2005), there still might be regional variation in how this coverage is presented. Similarly, community characteristics such as local crime and neighborhood safety could impact the attentiveness of viewers and the focus of local media reports of crime. Future studies could benefit from multilevel modeling that takes both regional differences in crime media presentations as well as crime-related neighborhood factors into account.

Fourth, we also found race/ethnic differences among women for other forms of crime-related media, such as crime-reality television, but these effects did not seem to follow a discernible pattern. This underscores the importance of understanding both the content of the specific genre being consumed as well as the audiences that consume them. Future research should continue to examine race and gender differences for discernible patterns in media effects on perceptions of and fear of crime.

A final limitation is that the results come from a survey conducted in 1998. Although digital media and the Internet existed, usage was not as prevalent as it is now. However, market research suggests that the vast majority of people still get their information from traditional news sources (Pew Research Center, 2012). Television news still remain the number one source of information for all Americans. For example, a 2012 Pew Internet Research Report found individuals still relied on local television for their news, which has only fallen slightly since 1998 from about 59% to 55%. And although usage of social media sites to access news information has significantly increased (e.g., about 30% of all adults used Facebook for their news in 2013), individuals who use these sites are no less likely to also use traditional media (Holcomb, Gottfried, & Mitchell, 2013).

More importantly, recent reports suggest that those who rely on alternative electronic sources for their news are being fed the same information as that which is broadcast on television or published in the newspapers. Media conglomeration has expanded as legal barriers to media acquisitions have loosened so that fewer companies control more media outlets, including cable television and Internet sites (Cooper, 2005). Moreover, declining revenues have forced newspapers and television stations to share resources (e.g., stories) with erstwhile competitors; something that was seldom done before the Internet (Potter & Matsa, 2014). So while the number of media channels has exploded with the Internet, mobile phones and other electronic media devices, most media messages are merely repackaged and reproduced (Cooper, 2005).

To sum, the findings from the survey suggest that some crime-related messages may be differentially interpreted dependent on individual’s gender and/or race. However, the relative lack of gender differences in the effects of crime-related media consumption appears more supportive of Gerbner’s cultivation hypothesis than the differential reception thesis. This is particularly true when we find that irrespective of gender, television news consumption had the greatest impact on individual’s perception of crime risk in their neighborhood and of their fear of crime. In short, the presentation of crime in television news alarms most everyone—just as Gerbner predicted so many years ago.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

References

Akers

R. L.

La Greca

A. J.

Sellers

Cochran

(1987). Fear of crime and victimization among the elderly in different types of communities. Criminology, 25, 487–505.

Baumer

T. L.

(1978). Research on fear of crime in the United States. Victimology, 3, 254–264.

Baumer

T. L.

(1985). Testing a general model of fear of crime: Data from a national sample. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 22, 239–255.

Bjornstrom

E. E. S.

Kaufman

R. L.

Peterson

R. D.

Slater

M. D.

(2010). Race and ethnic representations of lawbreakers and victims in crime news: A national study of television coverage. Social Problems, 57, 269–293.

Britto

Hughes

Saltzman

Stroh

(2007). Does “special” mean young, white and female? Deconstructing the meaning of “special” in Law & Order: Special victims unit. Journal of Criminal Justice & Popular Culture, 14, 39–57.

Callanan

V. J.

(2012). Media consumption, perceptions of crime risk and fear of crime: Examining race/ethnic differences. Sociological Perspectives, 55, 93–115.

Callanan

V. J.

Teasdale

(2009). An exploration of gender differences in measurement of fear of crime. Feminist Criminology, 4, 359–376.

Chermak

S. M.

(1995). Victims in the news: Crime & the American news media. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Chiricos

Eschholz

Gertz

(1997). Crime, news and fear of crime: Toward an identification of audience effects. Social Problems, 44, 342–356.

10.

Chiricos

Padgett

Gertz

(2000). Fear, TV news, and the reality of crime. Criminology, 38, 755–785.

11.

Cooper

(2005). Reclaiming the first amendment: Legal, factual and analytical support for limits on media ownership. In McChesney

Newman

Scott

(eds.), The future of media: Resistance and reform in the 21st century (pp. 9–20). New York, NY: Seven Stories Press.

12.

Doob

MacDonald

(1979). Television viewing and fear of victimization: Is the relationship causal? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 170–179.

13.

Entman

R. M.

(1990). Modern racism and the images of Blacks in local television news. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 7, 332–345.

14.

Eschholz

(1997). The media and fear of crime: A survey of the research. Journal of Law and Public Policy, 9, 37–59.

15.

Eschholz

Chiricos

Gertz

(2003). Television and fear of crime: Program types, audience traits and the mediating effects of perceived neighborhood racial composition. Social Problems, 50, 395–415.

16.

Ferraro

K. F.

(1995). Fear of crime: Interpreting victimization risk. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

17.

Ferraro

K. F.

(1996). Women’s fear of victimization: Shadow of sexual assault? Social Forces, 75, 667–690.

18.

Ferraro

K. F.

LaGrange

(1987). The measurement of fear of crime. Sociological Inquiry, 57, 70–101.

19.

Fisher

B. S.

Sloan

J. J.

(2003). Unraveling the fear of victimization among college women: Is the “shadow of sexual assault hypothesis” supported? Justice Quarterly, 20, 633–655.

20.

Franklin

C. A.

Franklin

T. W.

(2009). Predicting fear of crime. Feminist Criminology, 4, 83–106.

21.

Garofalo

(1977). Public opinion about crime: The attitudes of victims and nonvictims in selected cities. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

22.

Garofalo

(1981). The fear of crime: Causes and consequences. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 72, 839–857.

23.

Gerbner

Gross

(1976). Living with television: The violence profile. Neiman Reports, 50, 10–16.

24.

Gerbner

Gross

Eleey

M. F.

Jackson-Beeck

Jefferies-Fox

Signorielli

(1977). TV violence profile no. 8: The highlights. Journal of Communication, 27, 171–180.

25.

Gerbner

Gross

Morgan

Signorielli

(1980). The “Mainstreaming” of America: Violence Profile No. 11. Journal of Communication, 30, 10–29.

26.

Gilchrist

Bannister

Ditton

Farrall

(1998). Women and the fear of crime: Challenging the accepted stereotype. British Journal of Criminology, 38, 283–298.

27.

Gomme

I. M.

(1988). The role of experience in the production of fear of crime: A test of a causal model. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 30, 67–76.

28.

Goodey

(1997). Boys don’t cry: Masculinities, fear of crime and fearlessness. British Journal of Criminology, 37, 401–418.

29.

Grabe

M. E.

Drew

D. G.

(2007). Crime cultivation: Comparisons across media genres and channels. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 51, 147–171.

30.

Grabe

M. E.

Kamhawi

Yegiyan

(2009). Informing citizens: How people with different levels of education process television, newspaper, and web news. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53, 90–111.

31.

Hale

(1996). Fear of crime: A review of the literature. International Review of Victimology, 4, 79–150.

32.

Haynie

D. L.

(1998). The gender gap in fear of crime, 1973-1994: A methodological approach. Criminal Justice Review, 23, 29–50.

33.

Heath

Kavanagh

Thompson

S. R.

(2001). Perceived vulnerability and fear of crime: Why fear stays high when crime rates drop. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 33, 1–12.

34.

Hirsch

(1980). The “scary world” of the nonviewer and other anomalies: A reanalysis of Gerbner et al.’s findings on the cultivation analysis. Part 1. Communication Research, 7, 403–456.

35.

Hirsch

(1981). On not learning from one’s own mistakes: A reanalysis of Gerbner et al.’s findings on the cultivation analysis. Part II. Communication Research, 8, 3–37.

36.

Holcomb

Gottfried

Mitchell

(2013). News use around social media platforms. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center, Retrieved January 4, 2015, from http://www.journalism.org/2013/11/14/news-use-across-social-media-platforms/

37.

Hollander

(2001). Vulnerability and dangerousness: The construction of gender through conversation about violence. Gender & Society, 15, 83–109.

38.

Hughes

P. P.

Marshall

Sherrill

(2003). Multidimensional analysis of fear and confidence of university women relating to crime and dangerous situations. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18, 33–49.

39.

Johnstone

J. W. C.

Darnell

F. H.

Arthur

(1994). Homicide reporting in Chicago dailies. Journalism Quarterly, 71, 860–872.

40.

Killias

Clerici

(2000). Different measured of vulnerability in their relation to different dimensions of fear of crime. British Journal of Criminology, 40, 437–450.

41.

LaGrange

R. L.

Ferraro

K. F.

(1989). Assessing age and gender differences in perceived risk and fear of crime. Criminology, 27, 697–720.

42.

Lane

Meeker

J. W.

(2003). Ethnicity, information sources and fear of crime. Deviant Behavior, 24, 1–26.

43.

May

D. C.

Rader

N. E.

Goodrum

(2010). A gendered assessment of the “threat of victimization”: Examining gender differences in fear of crime, perceived risk, avoidance, and defense behaviors. Criminal Justice Review, 35, 159–182.

44.

Madriz

(1997). Images of criminals and victims: A study on women’s fear and social control. Gender and Society, 11, 342–356.

45.

Morgan

Shanahan

(1997). Two decades of cultivation research: An appraisal and meta-analysis. Communication Yearbook, 20, 1–45.

46.

O’Keefe

(1984). Public views on crime: Television exposure and media credibility. In Bostrom

(ed.), Communication Yearbook (pp. 514–535). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

47.

O’Keefe

Reid-Nash

(1987). Crime news and real-world blues: The effects of the media on social reality. Communication Research, 14, 147–168.

48.

Pain

(2001). Gender, race, age and fear in the city. Urban Studies, 38, 899–913.

49.

Pantazis

(2000). ‘Fear of Crime,’ vulnerability and poverty. British Journal of Criminology, 40, 414–436.

50.

Parker

K. D.

Ray

M. C.

(1990). Fear of crime: An assessment of related factors. Sociological Spectrum, 10, 29–40.

51.

Paternoster

Brame

Mazerolle

Piquero

(1998). Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology, 36, 859–866.

52.

Paulsen

D. J.

(2003). Murder in black and white. Homicide Studies, 7, 289–317.

53.

Peelo

Francis

Pearson

Soothill

(2004). The reporting trajectories of top homicide cases in the media: A case study of The Times. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 43, 1–14.

54.

Pew Research Center. (2012). Where American get news. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Retrieved January 4, 2015, from http://www.journalism.org/media-indicators/where-americans-get-news/

55.

Potter

Matsa

K. A.

(2014). A boom in acquisitions and content sharing shapes local TV news in 2013. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Retrieved January 5, 2015, from http://www.journalism.org/2014/03/26/a-boom-in-acquisitions-and-content-sharing-shapes-local-tv-news-in-2013/

56.

Potter

J. W.

(1986). Perceived reality and the cultivation hypothesis. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 30, 159–174.

57.

Prichard

Hughes

K. D.

(1997). Patterns of deviance in crime news. Journal of Communication, 47, 49–67.

58.

Reid

L. W.

Konrad

(2004). The gender gap in fear: Assessing the interactive effects of gender and perceived risk on fear of crime. Sociological Spectrum, 24, 399–425.

59.

Riger

Gordon

Le Bailley

(1978). Women’s fear of crime: From blaming to restricting the victim. Victimology, 3, 274–284.

60.

Romer

Jamieson

K. H.

Aday

(2003). Television news and the cultivation of fear of crime. Journal of Communication, 53, 88–104.

61.

Schafer

J. A.

Huebner

B. M.

Bynum

T. S.

(2006). Fear of crime and criminal victimization: Gender-based contrasts. Journal of Criminal Justice, 34, 285–301.

62.

Scheider

M. C.

Rowell

Bezdikian

(2003). The impact of citizen perceptions of community policing on fear of crime: Findings from twelve cities. Police Quarterly, 6, 363–386.

63.

Scott

(2003). Stranger danger: Explaining women’s fear of crime. Western Criminology Review, 4, 203–214.

64.

Shrum

L. J.

Bischak

V. D.

(2001). Mainstreaming, resonance, and impersonal impact. Testing moderators of the cultivation effect for estimates of crime risk. Human Communication Research, 27, 187–215.

65.

Silverman

Kennedy

(1985). Loneliness, satisfaction, and fear of crime: A test for non-recursive effects. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 27, 1–13.

66.

Skogan

W. G.

(1993). The various meanings of fear. In Bilsky

Pfeiffer

Wetzels

(eds.), Fear of crime and criminal victimization (pp. 131–141). Stuttgart, Germany: Enke.

67.

Skogan

W. G.

(1990). Disorder and decline: Crime and the spiral of decay in American cities. New York, NY: The Free press.

68.

Skogan

W. G.

Maxfield

M. G.

(1981). Coping with crime: Individual & neighborhood reactions. Washington, DC: United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

69.

Slater

Elliott

W. R.

(1982). Television’s influence on social reality. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 68, 69–79.

70.

Smith

W. R.

Torstensson

(1997). Gender differences in risk perception and neutralizing fear of crime: Toward resolving the paradoxes. British Journal of Criminology, 37, 608–634.

71.

Stanko

E. A.

(1992). The case of fearful women: Gender, personal safety and fear of crime. Women & Criminal Justice, 4, 117–135.

72.

Stanko

E. A.

(1995). Women, crime, and fear. Annals of the American Academy of Political & Social Science, 539, 46–58.

73.

Surette

(2007). Media, crime, and criminal Justice: Images and reality. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

74.

Taylor

R. B.

Hale

(1986). Testing alternative models of fear of crime. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 77, 151–189.

75.

Warr

(1984). Fear of victimization: Why are women and the elderly more afraid? Social Science Quarterly, 65, 681–702.

76.

Warr

(1987). Fear of victimization and sensitivity to risk. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 3, 29–46.

77.

Warr

Ellison

C. G.

(2000). Rethinking social reactions to crime: Personal and altruistic fear in family households. American Journal of Sociology, 106, 551–578.

78.

Warr

Stafford

M. C.

(1983). Fear of victimization: A look at the proximate causes. Social Forces, 61, 1033–1043.

79.

Weinrath

Gartrell

(1996). Victimization and fear of crime. Violence and Victims, 11, 187–197.

80.

Weiss

Chermak

S. M.

(1998). The news value of African American victims: An examination of the media’s presentation of homicide. Journal of Crime and Justice, 21, 71–88.

81.

Weitzer

Kubrin

C. E.

(2004). Breaking news: How local TV news and real-world conditions affect fear of crime. Justice Quarterly, 21, 497–519.