Abstract
This special issue of Criminal Justice Review, “Crime in the Ivory Tower: Understanding Campus Victimization and Evaluating Efforts to Prevent It,” comes at a fitting time in our field. High-profile mass shootings and other violent, interpersonal crimes occurring on college campuses have captivated media attention and public concern. At the same time, these tragedies have affirmed that the “ivory tower” is no longer a safe haven where students learn and discover but instead places where they may encounter crime and violence. As a result, the federal government and states have wrestled with how best to measure and respond to campus crime.
Given this recent public policy emphasis, this special issue includes six empirical articles that broadly examine the nature and extent of campus victimization or crime policy efforts to address and prevent it. The first article is entitled, “University Policies and Programs for Crime Prevention and Awareness: An Examination of Online Reports and Resources.” It explored whether and how institutions have implemented various facets of the Clery Act, a seminal piece of legislation in addressing campus crime, such as providing online educational information to the university community. Its findings indicate that most universities comply with the Act, but also that variation exists across regions and student populations. An additional discovery was that virtually no institution has gone beyond the minimum standards set by Clery. These results indicate that online outreach could be improved in the future to better educate and assist the student population.
In a different direction, the study, “Who Seeks Counseling for Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)? The Role of Emotional Distress,” aims to evaluate the factors related to receiving victim assistance for dating violence among college students. Prior investigations have revealed that student victim use of services is abysmally low. Accordingly, the study endeavored to enhance knowledge of the challenges and factors concerning use of assistance. In the study, college students who experienced greater levels of IPV and with self-reported higher emotional distress were significantly more likely to pursue counseling than those with lower exposure to IPV and distress. Demographic indicators, specifically age and sex, were also associated with greater help-seeking behavior. In particular, older students and women, compared to younger students and men, had a higher likelihood of utilizing counseling services. Findings from path model analysis indicate that more complex relationships might also exist as victimization accompanied by emotional distress significantly predicted help-seeking behavior among students. Even so, as the authors report, less than 1 in 10 student victims seek counseling services. Collectively, the study has clear implications for policy efforts to assist victims of IPV, such as increasing crime prevention educational efforts and making services more accessible.
A separate investigation, “College Women’s Perceptions of and Inclination to Use Campus Sexual Assault Resources: Comparing the Views of Students With and Without Sexual Victimization Histories,” is critical for assessing the conditions under which sex crime victims might use and seek assistance. Although recent federal statistics indicate campus sexual assault affects a wide swath of students over a typical college career, student victims rarely disclose sexual victimization to law enforcement and their use of victim assistance and services is strikingly infrequent. Applying both quantitative and qualitative methods, the study shines a light on the barriers to effective victim assistance by evaluating whether differences exist across those with prior sexual victimization histories. Quantitative results demonstrated that victims express significantly less confidence in campus resources and report lower interest in attending self-defense classes than nonvictims. Directly relevant for policy efforts are findings from a follow-up qualitative analysis. Among this subsample of victims (i.e., those who reported reduced interest in using victim services), logistical (e.g., little time to attend) and perceptual barriers (e.g., no interest in attending) explained victims’ hesitancy in seeking university assistance. This finding is notable because it suggests that prevention and assistance efforts consider the victim perspective in tailoring and delivering services to crime victims.
Future policy efforts may also be informed by evaluation of the factors and environments associated with experiencing campus victimization, particularly recurrent offending among students. The fourth examination, “Intoxication and Crime Risk: Contextualizing the Effects of ‘Party’ Routines on Recurrent Physical and Sexual Attacks among College Students,” investigates this very issue by emphasizing the “party lifestyle” so prominent across U.S. colleges and universities. Applying tenets of the routine activities theory, ordinal logistic regression results indicate that for female students, spending time at bars doubles their risk of experiencing repeat physical assaults and unwanted sexual contact. However, for males’ victimization risk, self-reported alcohol and drug use were more influential indicators. For both female and male students, however, engaging in marijuana use is the only “party routine” that increases the risk of repeat sexual assault. The study thus presents clear recommendations for future student safety strategies. One is to increase capable guardianship, particularly in the context of “partying,” which as the authors aptly observe is so prevalent across the typical college campus. Such efforts include developing and implementing bystander intervention programs that empower fellow classmates to act on behalf of vulnerable peers in risky or victimization-inducing situations.
A related but distinct line of inquiry involves how student victims cope with the aftermath of experiencing crime and violence. With the advent of the Internet, virtual crime has become all too typical on the college campus. How do students deal with the effects of cyber crime? What are its lasting impacts? The article, “Cyber Victimization on College Campuses: Longitudinal Associations with Suicidal Ideation, Depression, and Anxiety,” delves into the impact of experiencing cyber-related interpersonal offenses such as harassment and threatening behavior. In the study, such victimization contributed to the development of serious mental health outcomes among students over time, such as suicidal ideation, depression, and anxiety. In addition, reciprocal effects were observed in the cross-lagged models—specifically, suicidal ideation, depression, and anxiety each contributed to cyber victimization. Given the serious and lasting consequences of cyber victimization, the author identifies sage recommendations for campus policy. Namely, she highlights increasing online literacy, enhancing digital etiquette, and providing adequate coping resources for victimized students as methods to improve public safety in the virtual world.
The final investigation, “Mandatory Reporting (MR) in Higher Education: College Students’ Perceptions of Laws Designed to Reduce Campus Sexual Assault,” emphasizes the student voice in campus crime debates. States are considering mandating reporting for select campus offenses, such as sexual assault involving student-victims. How though do the targets the laws purport to protect, college students, perceive such initiatives? Findings from a large poll of undergraduates attending a public university show clear approval for MR. Additionally, most students would personally report assault under the new law, and an overwhelming majority believe their professors would comply with their reporting duties. Not least, although students acknowledge the advantages and disadvantages of MR, larger consensus was reached regarding the law’s possible benefits (e.g., ensuring university accountability). The study is notable as it is the first to gauge student views’ of controversial new laws designed to respond to campus sexual assault.
Recent high-profile tragedies highlight that colleges and universities are not immune from crime and violence. Such incidents that occur in the esteemed ivory tower adversely harm the university community and shake public confidence and trust in the sanctity of social institutions. For these reasons, continued emphasis on studying, understanding, and responding to campus crime should be a top priority among criminologists in 2016 and beyond.