Victimization behavior - types, causes, prevention, correction

Victimization is a person’s predisposition to be a victim. At the same time, there is a difference between social predisposition, where the likelihood of becoming a victim depends on the crime situation in the region, as well as psychological victimization, when characterological and personality traits acquired as a result of upbringing or psychological traumas received contribute to provoking behavior.

The victim's victimization due to psychological factors has been seriously criticized by many authors and is practically discredited in jurisprudence, where only one party bears responsibility for the crime committed. To prove this, facts are cited that the victim’s behavior is perceived as a provocation exclusively by the criminal and is not objective. That is why this concept is not used in court cases of murder and rape, but has a place in practical psychology. It makes sense to talk about victimization when a person has an increased likelihood of getting into trouble, which is caused by various internal reasons.

What is victimization behavior

The concept of victimization was introduced in the science of victimology, which studies the behavior of victims and criminals. Special behavior, at the verbal and non-verbal level, forces criminals to almost unmistakably choose certain individuals for their victims. For example, if a rapist shows aggression towards several women, then he will continue his actions only with the one who cowers in fear, remains silent, tolerates inappropriate behavior, tries not to attract attention, and at the same time looks scared. Those who immediately fight back, engage the public in interaction and make it clear that such actions are unacceptable are most likely to be left alone.

Currently, the concept of victimization implies not only a greater likelihood of being attacked by another person, but also verbal abuse, humiliation and the frequency of exposure to unpleasant and traumatic situations such as accidents, accidents, choking doors or frequently breaking appliances. Suffering from military operations and natural disasters fits here; a person looks like a magnet that attracts failures.

Like any concept, victimization has its own distinctive features and characteristics. Such people are characterized by unstable emotional reactions and a distorted perception of their own feelings, which ultimately leads to the formation of an external locus of control.

A victimized person will take a passive position in his decisions and will largely seek guidance, taking a subordinate position. Submissiveness, combined with suggestibility and low self-esteem, creates favorable conditions for gradually becoming a chronic victim in the future, even if such episodes have not happened in a person’s life before.

Peculiarities of upbringing that do not imply the development of caution form a frivolous style of behavior, the inability to distinguish between dangerous situations, and, accordingly, the ability to stand up for oneself or leave the area of unfavorable developments in time.

The socially approved qualities of diligence and conscientiousness, in their extreme manifestation, form a position always ready for submission. Moreover, the more a person has to obey others in life, the more difficult it is to refuse and resist him when there is a real need, thanks to the developed strategy of behavior. Such people argue that it is easier to submit to the rapist and avoid beatings, to withstand beatings from your husband and thereby allow him to calm down, to complete a week's work quota in two days to the detriment of health, but to maintain the favor of colleagues. There are many rationalizations, but the result is the same - a person suffers and continues to suffer.

Victimization comes in different directions and degrees of severity. In general, such a couple is inherent in any person, and in a healthy version it is responsible for the opportunity to sacrifice one’s interests for the sake of further gain. However, being a personal characteristic, victimization is considered a pathological trait and requires psychological and sometimes psychiatric correction.

Psychological foundations of the concept of “individual victimization of the individual”

Personal vulnerability has a complex structure in which predispositions (subjective and objective qualities) are updated by a specific situation and turn into preconditions for causing harm. A greater predisposition is not always expressed in greater realized victimization (Riveman, 1975). As already mentioned, the quality in question is designated in victimology by the term “individual victimization.”

The term “victimization” was introduced into scientific circulation by L. V. Frank. Frank initially defined individual victimization “as the “predisposition” realized by a criminal act, or rather, the ability to become a victim of a crime under certain circumstances or, in other words, the inability to avoid danger where it was objectively preventable.” As can be seen from this definition, L.V. Frank considered individual victimization as a personal predisposition and ability realized by a criminal act. He later added that individual victimization is not only the realized, but also the potential ability of “certain persons to become victims or, in other words, the inability to avoid a criminal attack where this was objectively possible.” This means not an average, but an increased ability to become a victim “due to a number of subjective and objective circumstances.”

Therefore, according to Frank, individual victimization

- this is a potential, as well as realized, increased ability to become a victim of a criminal attack, provided that objectively this could have been avoided.

V.I. Polubinsky defines individual victimization as a property of a given person, conditioned by his social, psychological or biophysical qualities (or their combination), which contributes in a certain life situation to the formation of conditions under which the possibility of causing harm to him by illegal actions arises. In other words, the victimization of a particular individual represents his potential ability to find himself in the role of a crime victim as a result of the negative interaction of his personal qualities with external factors. Crime only realizes such a property, objectifies this ability.

Individual victimization, therefore, consists of personal and situational components, and the qualitative characteristics of the first are systemically dependent on the second.

The personal component of individual victimization is the ability to become a victim due to certain subjective qualities inherent in the individual. An increased degree of vulnerability due to the personal component of victimization follows from the presence of corresponding victim predispositions, i.e. social, psychological, biophysical qualities that increase the degree of vulnerability of the individual and manifest themselves more actively.

Victimization is also characterized by such a qualitative parameter as universality, that is, the possibility of implementation in situations of a more or less wide range of crimes. In this regard, victimization manifests itself as general and special (or selective)

characteristics of a person. These characteristics do not express the degree of vulnerability of a person (high, medium, low victimization). They only represent the most complete “set” of general and special victim potentials for a given person, each of which can manifest itself to varying degrees (from minimal to highest).

With a certain degree of convention, it is customary to highlight the psychological aspects of victimization: special victimization and general victimization, associated with gender, age, social role and social status of the victim. It is quite difficult to make a constructive distinction between these two types of victimization. For example, a number of studies have found that:

• the victim of a murder is characterized by imprudence, excessive risk-taking, conflict, a tendency to aggression, egocentrism, alcohol abuse, often the victim is familiar with the criminal;

• rape victims are often promiscuous, eccentric, or, conversely, indecisive, personally immature, have no experience of sexual relations, and childish;

• victims of torture in most cases are familiar with the offender and are in one way or another dependent on him (wife, cohabitant, child, mother); by nature they are often weak-willed and do not have stable life positions or formed interests, sometimes lead an immoral lifestyle, often their social status is higher than the status of a torturer;

• victims of scammers are overly gullible, incompetent, gullible, in some cases greedy or experiencing financial difficulties, and often superstitious.

The listed predominantly psychological qualities of crime victims are in one way or another connected with characteristics related to general victimization. Therefore, identifying individual psychological qualities of victims is an extremely important and complex task of victimological analysis.

Some scientists identify two constitutive types of victimization (Tulyakov, 2004):

ü personal

(as an objectively existing quality in a person, expressed in the subjective ability of some individuals, due to the complex of psychological properties formed in them, to become victims of a certain type of crime in conditions where there was a real and obvious opportunity for ordinary consciousness to avoid this);

ü role-playing

(as an objectively existing characteristic of certain social roles in given living conditions, expressed in the danger for the persons performing them, regardless of their personal qualities, to be subjected to a certain type of criminal attack only by virtue of performing such a role).

Thus, victimization

how a deviation from the norms of safe behavior is realized in a combination of
social
(status characteristics of role victims and behavioral deviations from the norms of individual and social safety),
mental
(pathological victimization, fear of crime and other anomalies) and
moral
(interiorization of victimogenic norms, rules of behavior of victim and criminal subcultures, victimized intrapersonal conflicts) manifestations (Sabitov, 1985).

The outstanding Japanese victimologist K. Miyazawa also identified general victimization, depending on the social, role and gender characteristics of the victim, and special, realized in the attitudes, properties and attributions of the individual. Moreover, according to K. Miyazawa, when these two types are layered on top of each other, victimization increases.

Victimization can manifest itself in two main forms:

1) eventual (from the Latin eventus - case) victimization;

2) decidivistic (from the Latin decido - decision) victimization (Tulyakov, 1997).

Eventual victimization

(potential victimization), meaning the possibility, on occasion, under certain circumstances, in a certain situation, of becoming a victim of a crime, includes causally determined and causally consistent deviations. Naturally, the characteristics of eventual victimization are mainly determined by the frequency of victimization of certain layers and groups of the population and the patterns inherent in such victimization.

Deciduous victimization

(victimization in action), covering the stages of preparation and adoption of a victimogenic decision, and the victimization activity itself, accordingly, includes expedient and purposeful deviations that serve as a catalyst for crime.

Thus, according to psychologists, people who consciously or unconsciously choose the social role of a victim (an attitude of helplessness, reluctance to change their own situation without outside intervention, low self-esteem, intimidation, increased readiness to learn victim behavior, assimilate victim stereotypes from society and the community), are constantly involved in various criminogenic crisis situations with the subconscious goal of obtaining as much sympathy, support from others, and justification of the role position of the victim as possible.

For example, according to the research results of J. Sutul, given in the work of B.L. Gulman, the classic portrait of a rape victim includes features of fatalism, timidity, modesty, lack of a sense of security, and pronounced susceptibility to suggestion.

Cowardice and pliability can be combined with increased aggressiveness and conflict in psychopathic victims, hysterics who choose the position of the “offended” in order to be constantly ready for an explosion of negative emotions and receive satisfaction from reversing society’s negative reaction to them, strengthening the role properties of the victim.

Causes of victimization

Victimization of the victim is manifested in the commission of actions leading to dangerous or negative consequences. Self-preservation instincts, intended for the reverse function, do not work at the moment or appear conditionally, for example, only at the verbal level, and are absent at the behavioral level. Several main reasons lead to such deformations.

Initially, this is a personality type that outlines a passive-subordinate position. These are the majority of victims, and their behavior looks like fulfilling the demands of the aggressor. Perhaps they will not be fulfilled completely or slowly, but, nevertheless, the person obeys.

The second personality type is the provocative one. Such people unconsciously seek to attract attention to themselves or are not aware of the consequences of their actions. Vivid examples of provocative behavior are counting large sums of money in an unfavorable public place (at a train station or in a crime-prone area in the evening), sexualized behavior that goes beyond the boundaries of flirting, etc.

Upbringing and experiences of childhood psychotrauma contribute to the appearance of a victim complex. The highest risk of developing victimized behavior is in victims of violence who received no help and support, who did not receive psychotherapy, or who were all close to them who took the side of the rapist and blamed the victim for what happened.

Children of victimized or dysfunctional parents (various types of addiction, low level of social culture, high level of aggressiveness, etc.) do not form an adequate assessment of the situation, and they build relationships with the world like their parents’ family. Such a child may be extremely surprised that in other families no one is ever beaten; in addition, the concept of punishment becomes so necessary that, having matured, a person begins to provoke violence from those who were not inclined to do so, due to his own increased level of anxiety.

Involvement in various antisocial groups, oddly enough, also shapes the behavior of the victim. It is worth noting that not only bright groups that violate the general order influence the formation of the victim’s position, but also any society. Teachers with emotional burnout do not teach children to resist aggression, but pour out negativity on children; the peer group may be of a low social level and bully those who are different. The more acts of violence are perceived by the immediate environment as the norm, the greater tolerance is formed in the individual.

Victimization, according to one of the authors of researchers of the Soviet period of the former Union L.V. Frank, is the “increased ability of a person”, due to his social role and a number of physical and spiritual qualities, to “become a victim” under certain circumstances.

V.P. Polubinsky, developing the thought of L.V. Frank, proposes to distinguish four types of such “ability”: “individual”, “species”, “group” and “mass”. At the same time, “individual” victimization refers to the properties (of a social, biophysical or psychological nature) of an individual that, in a certain life situation, contribute to the creation of conditions for committing a crime with causing him certain harm.

“Species” victimization, according to V.P. Polubinsky, expressed in the “predisposition” of individual people, due to a number of circumstances, become victims of certain types of crimes (for example, robbery, rape, etc.).

“Group” victimization consists of a common “increased ability” for certain categories of people who have similar social, demographic, psychological, biophysical and other qualities to become victims of crime (collectors, watchmen, taxi drivers, etc.).

“Mass” victimization is an objectively existing possibility for a certain part of people, due to their subjective qualities, to suffer physical, moral and material damage from crimes.

When determining “victimity,” as can be seen from these sources, the decisive and only criterion takes into account the characteristics of the victim. However, an individual may be a victim not simply and purely due to his “personal” characteristics, but due to their combination or relationship with other factors. In addition, the human condition is terminologically designated unsuccessfully as “ability.” We should rather talk about the likelihood of an individual being, under certain objective conditions, in the role of a victim. Taking into account these comments, in general one must agree with the above proposals about the role of knowledge of criminological victimization.

In the literature, victimization is divided into two other main types: general (depending on age, gender, occupation, social status, etc.) and special (depending on mental instability, the characteristics of the will of alcohol intoxication, the characteristics of the will and emotional instability and etc.). As some analysis shows, when these two types of victimization are layered, the degree of victimization increases significantly.

One of the promising areas of criminological victimology is the study of types (groups) of crimes. Such a study allows us to obtain significant information about victim behavior, establish the factors causing increased victimization, and link victim behavior with criminal behavior, thus contributing to the development of measures aimed at crime prevention.

Therefore, at present, the study of individual types and groups of crimes is carried out quite highly and intensively. And in this regard, two main questions arise.

First of all, the question of interest is who becomes the victim of a crime? This issue, of course, should be studied not only (and not so much) to satisfy the need for knowledge, but mainly with the aim of identifying the most victimogenic social groups.

Relevant studies indicate that women are characterized by increased victimization - in cases of committing crimes such as fraud, torture; men – in cases of murder and grievous bodily harm. This circumstance is apparently related to the nature of the social roles performed by men and women in the formal and informal spheres, and to their way of life in everyday life.

In almost half of the cases, the victims of a violent crime are relatives or acquaintances of the offender. This is especially true for hooliganism, murder, and grievous bodily harm. As for rape, in most cases it is committed against strangers (casual acquaintances).

The second most important question is: what contributes to becoming a victim? This is the central question of any victimological research, because Without knowing the answer to it, it is impossible to carry out victimological crime prevention.

One answer to the question posed could be this: victims become victims because the criminals themselves choose them. Although not in all situations of crime the stage of choosing a victim of a criminal attack can be traced, nevertheless, the noted circumstance is inherent in many crimes. From a practical point of view, studying the signs that a criminal focuses on when choosing a victim contributes to the development of measures that help prevent and detect criminal acts (for example, detaining a criminal red-handed).

The likelihood that certain categories of people will become victims of a crime varies depending on the type of crime committed.

Thus, the victim of hooliganism is more not accidental than the victim of rape. At the same time, the victim of fraud is less random from the point of view considered than the victim of rape. The factor of chance (not chance) manifests itself depending on the method of committing the crime, the “professional” preparedness of the criminal, etc.

When choosing a victim, criminals are guided by various signs: the presence of a significant amount of valuables, the fact that the alleged victim committed crimes, external data (search for “simpletons”), age, life experience, inclinations, character traits (alcohol addiction, gullibility, etc. .).

Of the total number of victims who were strangers to the accused, 42.2% were killed during a robbery.

The age of the victims is characterized by the following data:

Table 2
Age of victims
Years Robbery Extortion for profit Robbery Murder Banditry

Under 18 years old 7.0 4.0 8.0 – –

18–30 years old 16.2 11.7 24.5 23.6 19.8

31–40 years 32.3 29.2 36.4 28.1 23.9

Over 50 years 10.0 20.1 9.0 27.8 29.9

When studying, in order to prevent circumstances conducive to mercenary-violent crimes, it is important to obtain information about the behavior of victims. Such work primarily concerns relatives, and only then acquaintances and strangers, mainly between the ages of 30 and 50.

The choice of a crime victim by a criminal is an important, but not the only factor that determines victimization. Another circumstance is also significant – the type of behavior of the victim. As we have already said, it is advisable to distinguish between the behavior of the victim before, at the time and after the commission of the crime.

So, before committing a crime, behavior can be:

1. Provoking,

when a person, through his actions, creates a criminogenic situation.

2. Active,

when a person does not create a criminogenic situation, but through his actions significantly contributes to its occurrence.

3. Passive

, when the role of the victim in creating a criminogenic situation is insignificant or absent altogether, i.e. a person becomes a victim, as a rule, without connection with his behavior before the crime was committed.

Based on the actions of the victim at the time of the crime, we can distinguish:

a) behavior of a person that contributes to the implementation of the criminal intentions of the offender;

b) the behavior of the victim, which does not contain elements that make it easier for the criminal to achieve a criminal result (“neutral” behavior);

c) behavior that strongly or weakly interferes with the implementation of an unlawful intention.

What circumstances related to the victim’s behavior can be considered provoking or facilitating?

In murders, this is most often immoral or unlawful behavior that arouses aggressiveness, anger and other negative emotions and the state of the perpetrator. The intent to kill often arises under the influence of physical violence, beatings, bullying, insults, rough or harsh treatment, threats, placing in a difficult financial situation, etc.

In rape, the crime is provoked under the influence of frivolous or immoral behavior of the victim, which arouses sexual passion in the rapist, causes the illusion of sexual availability of the intended partner, in other words, creates a so-called risky situation.

In addition, attention should be paid to circumstances that express the weakened or helpless state of the victim, his ability to resist violence (for example, a helpless state, severe intoxication).

Acquisitive crimes are most often facilitated by the frivolous or immoral actions of the victim; negligent attitude towards the safety of one’s own property, indiscriminate choice of acquaintances, excessive gullibility towards dubious “friends” and strangers, joint drinking, gambling, sexual hobbies by future thieves of the victim’s property.

A significant place in many cases of crime is occupied by the “neutral” behavior of the victim. As a rule, this is the physical inaction of the victim, who either does not have time to do anything to protect himself due to the suddenness or swiftness of the attack (crime against the person), or is inactive due to the fact that his will is paralyzed by fear caused by threats and violence from culprit (murder, rape, robbery, robbery).

Of particular note are obstructive behaviours, e.g. situations in which a potential or actual victim takes measures to prevent or suppress a socially dangerous attack. These are either special precautions (burglar alarm), active (physical resistance, disobedience to illegal demands), or passive resistance (flight).

It must be said that according to many studies, only 25% of victims resist the criminal, while 3/4 of victims become passive.

The behavior of the victim after the commission of the crime deserves special attention. In practice, situations often occur when victims of a crime do not report this to the relevant authorities. From a criminological point of view, such behavior is one of the conditions conducive to the continuation of criminal behavior. Therefore, it is important to establish the reasons for the victims’ refusal to report what happened. Analysis of empirical material shows that such behavior of victims is explained by: friendly relations with the criminal, reluctance to deal with formal criminal procedural relations, reluctance to “compromise oneself” before the laws, friends and illnesses, fear of disclosing the fact of the assault, reluctance to destroy the family, the desire to “ deal" with the perpetrator, disbelief in the ability of law enforcement agencies to solve the crime, the pressure of related feelings, fear of the offender, a kind of self-sacrifice, taking the blame for what happened upon oneself, misconception regarding the nature of the guilty actions committed, etc. Provide their analysis for each type of crime and classification Accordingly, developing a system of victimological forecasting and prevention is a great task for the science of criminology.

It should be borne in mind that the failure of persons who have become victims of crime to report the event to the relevant authorities may be:

a) unlawful (in cases of deliberate criminal failure to report a crime);

b) immoral;

c) neutral, when the person does not realize that he has become a victim of a crime.

This indicates the need for a differentiated approach to assessing actions after the commission of a crime. Such an approach should be based on the study of the motives of behavior of victims, the diversity of which does not allow an unambiguous assessment of their actions after the commission of a crime.

Types of victimization

Being a multidimensional concept, victimization is divided into types.

Most often in criminology and psychology they talk about individual victimization, which implies a high probability of a particular individual becoming a victim, despite the fact that objectively this could have been avoided.

It is this type that is most associated with personal psychological traits, injuries received and characteristics of upbringing that shape the individual’s inadequate reaction. Such personal victimization is activated under appropriate circumstances, but instead of choosing safe behavior, the future victim unconsciously chooses a provocative line of behavior. In girls, this can manifest itself by staring into the eyes of strangers or trying to catch a car on the highway at night. Men boast about their material savings in the company of criminals or try to sort things out by physically resolving a conflict with a clearly stronger opponent.

A love of extreme sports, an unjustified desire for heroism, returning to the battlefield after being wounded are actions that are consciously chosen by a person, but they initially pose a threat to life. Some explain this by an increased need for adrenaline or a thirst to increase their self-esteem, and indeed such motivation exists, but the scale of sacrifice in this type of people is also increased.

Mass victimization concerns groups of people and has its own gradation, depending on the characteristics of individuals and conditions. Group victimization unites certain categories of the population that have the same characteristics or parameters of victimization (for example, children or disabled people). Object victimization involves the commission of certain types of crimes (theft, murder or rape). Most often, a person is susceptible to one type, that is, someone who is robbed is unlikely to be raped. Subjective victimization attracts various criminals.

The most striking example of mass victimization is Stockholm syndrome, when victims go over to the side of the aggressors. This does not happen immediately; sufficient continuous contact and strong traumatic emotions experienced are necessary, after which, even being held hostage and having received real physical injuries, the victims begin to protect the offenders, sympathize and help them.

Question 37. Victimization and its types

Victimization is the probability of an individual being, under certain objective conditions, in the role of a victim.

Individual victimization is the properties (of a social, biophysical or psychological nature) of an individual that, in a certain life situation, contribute to the creation of conditions for committing a crime with causing him certain harm.

Species victimization is the predisposition of individuals to become, due to a number of circumstances, victims of certain types of crimes (for example, robbery, rape, etc.).

Group victimization is common for certain categories of people who have similar social, demographic, psychological, biophysical and other qualities of “increased ability” to become victims of crime (collectors, watchmen, taxi drivers, etc.).

Mass victimization is an objectively existing possibility for a certain part of people, due to their subjective qualities, to suffer physical, moral and material damage from crimes.

When determining “victimization”, the decisive and only criterion is the characteristics of the victim. However, an individual may be a victim not simply and purely due to his “personal” characteristics, but due to their combination or relationship with other factors.

Two other main types : general (depending on age, gender, occupation, social status, etc.) and special (depending on mental instability, characteristics of the will of alcohol intoxication, characteristics of the will and emotional instability, etc.). As some analysis shows, when these two types of victimization are layered, the degree of victimization increases significantly.

Research shows that women are characterized by increased victimization - in cases of committing crimes such as fraud, torture; men – in cases of murder and grievous bodily harm. This circumstance is apparently related to the nature of the social roles performed by men and women in the formal and informal spheres, and to their way of life in everyday life.

1. Provoking, when a person, through his actions, creates a criminogenic situation.

2. Active, when a person does not create a criminogenic situation, but through his actions significantly contributes to its occurrence.

3. Passive, when the role of the victim in creating a criminogenic situation is insignificant or absent altogether, i.e. a person becomes a victim, as a rule, without connection with his behavior before the crime was committed.

How to get rid of victimization

The increased tendency to become a victim is not an innate quality, but accordingly can be corrected. In situations where the frequency and intensity of losses becomes significant, the condition is stabilized with tranquilizers and antidepressants with simultaneous psychotherapeutic correction.

If the situation is not so critical, then only psychotherapy aimed at restoring adequate self-esteem and developing new behavioral strategies is indicated. One of the main tasks is to shift the regulatory role of actions from an external source to an internal one. This means that before you make a decision or follow the advice, request or even order of someone, you need to correlate what is happening with your needs. In a healthy state, a person will not perform actions that cause him harm, no matter who asks for it, even his direct boss. This implies a greater share of responsibility for one’s life and its course. From this perspective, it is no longer possible to blame others for failures that have occurred or to look for excuses for why the misfortune occurred. Finding support in his feelings and decisions, a person himself begins to organize his life in a safe way, calculating the consequences in advance.

The absence of exposure to external manipulation is necessary so that others cannot play on feelings of guilt, pity or inferiority. A girl who knows her strengths and weaknesses is unlikely to agree to the offer “who needs you besides me, sit down.” The ability to refuse in any area of life is excellent training against victimization. The more the skill of tactful confrontation develops, the less chance there is of unknowingly becoming a victim.

It is necessary to start monitoring your own thoughts, because the more an individual feels sorry for himself and appears helpless and unhappy in his own eyes, the more such a state is transmitted to others. In essence, these are also provocations, because if someone complains the first time, they help him, the second time they don’t pay attention, and the third time it can cause very specific aggressive actions.