This article was downloaded by: [University Of Pittsburgh]On: 26 November 2014, At: 14:45Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Journal of OffenderRehabilitationPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjor20

Patterns of Violent Behaviorand Victimization AmongAfrican American YouthZina T. McGee PhD aa Hampton University , HamptonPublished online: 12 Oct 2008.

To cite this article: Zina T. McGee PhD (2000) Patterns of Violent Behavior andVictimization Among African American Youth, Journal of Offender Rehabilitation,30:1-2, 47-64, DOI: 10.1300/J076v30n01_03

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J076v30n01_03

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,

sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation, Violent Crime: The Realities and the Myths. Pp. 47-64.

E 2000 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

Patterns of Violent Behavior and VictimizationAmong African American Youth

ZINA T. McGEE

Hampton University

ABSTRACT This study examines differences in reported problems amongAfrican American youth exposed to violence and victimization. Results sug-gest that a substantial number of African American youth are exposed to directvictimization while in transit to and from school, while others are indirectlyvictimized by way of peer victimization. Additional support is found for theimpact of violence on mental health status, in that subjects exposed to violencereported greater post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms compared to youthwho were not exposed to violence. In light of these findings, it is suggested thatfuture studies continue to examine the impact of violence on the emotional devel-opment of youth. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth DocumentDelivery Service: 1-800-342-9678. E-mail address: getinfo@haworthpressinc.com<Website: http://www.haworthpressinc.com>]

KEYWORDS Violence, victimization, offending, inner-city schools, bru-talization effect

INTRODUCTION

This paper presents the results of a 2-year research effort to estimate theextent of violent victimization among inner-city youth in Virginia. Despitethe emergence of research devoted to violent behavior among urban youth(for example, see Esbensen and Huizinga, 1993; Fagan et al., 1986, 1987,1990; Finkelhor, 1997), many studies have not effectively addressed theissues of gun- and drug-related violence, particularly as it occurs within

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation, Violent Crime: The Realities and the Myths48

inner-city areas and schools. Further, very little is known about the victims ofsuch violence and the emotional disruption that may ensue. Although vio-lence remains a defining characteristic of many cities, few have explored thesignificance of mental health and development of children and adolescentsresiding in chronically violent neighborhoods (see Farrell and Bruce, 1997;Farver and Frosch, 1996; Hill and Madhere, 1996; Sampson, 1998 for excep-tions).

This article presents a discussion of the effects of victimization on mentalhealth status, and provides information on inner-city violence to educators,policy makers, researchers, and others dedicated to re-structuring the lives of‘‘at-risk’’ youth. Although this study’s results should be viewed as prelimi-nary, they suggest the need for rebuilding the societal structure of manyinner-city areas, as well as the need for increased intervention in the lives ofyouth at risk of community and school related violence.

HISTORY

The Survey of Violent Victimization (McGee, 1996) was developed toassess the extent of violent victimization among students at predominatelyBlack schools. While many studies have examined the extent to which stu-dents are victimized in and around schools in general, few researchers haveexamined violence in and around inner-city schools, and even less is knownabout the victims of such violence. Research continues to suggest that manyof the problems experienced by Black youth emerge out of the structure ofsociety, in which the patterns of social responses to their environment areimpaired (Brookins et al., 1997; Garbarino, 1996; Gibbs, 1988, 1989; Tobinand Gorman-Smith, 1997). The majority of studies that have been conducted,however, tend to emphasize the effects of television violence on youth asopposed to real-life events (for example, see Farver and Frosch, 1996). Fur-ther, it has been suggested that few epidemiological surveys of mental healthhave included adequate samples of Black youth (Myers, 1989). Garabino etal. (1992), in a recent study of violence and youth, argue that the issue ofviolence is particularly problematic for inner-city youth because of the trau-ma associated with community and school violence. In this vein, children andadolescents residing in war zones (i.e., areas plagued with gangs, crime anddrugs) are thought to be at a greater risk of psychological impairment due tocontinual exposure to a dangerous environment. In addition, research hasemphasized the existence of unconscious forces (i.e., resistance to sleep,nightmares, dreams of fear) among youth living in environments character-ized by fear (see Garabino et al., 1992; Greene, 1993; Timnick, 1992). Fur-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Zina T. McGee 49

ther, questions arise as to whether chronic exposure has an impact on desensi-tization and addiction to violence (Garabino, 1992; Timnick, 1992).

In the two-year period, the specific questions addressed in this projectwere:

S To what extent are inner-city youth victimized through use of firearms,knives and other weapons?

S Who are the victims of inner-city violence, and what factors place themat a greater risk of victimization?

S What impact does exposure to violence in and out of the school settinghave on the mental health status of youth residing in inner-city areas?

PREVIOUS RESEARCH

Recent studies have suggested that juveniles between the ages of 12 and 17have the highest rates of victimization for both crimes of violence and crimes oftheft within the adult population (Snyder and Sickmund, 1997). In 1994, juve-niles were almost three times as likely as adults to experience a crime-relatedinjury, although the rates of injury that required hospitalization were similar.Further, personal crimes with juvenile victims occurred most often in school oron school property (Snyder and Sickmund, 1997). With regard to gun victimiza-tion, studies have also shown that a gun was used in 1 in 4 serious violentoffenses against juveniles in 1994. Research studies have persuasively demon-strated an increase in violence-related behaviors on school property, as evi-denced in the numbers of juveniles reporting fear of victimization and subse-quent gun ownership (for example, see Maguire and Pastore, 1995).

These findings suggest the importance of the structural characteristics ofcommunities and inner city areas that may enhance the likelihood of violencein inner city schools. The proposed relationship between school and commu-nities has led many to argue that schools no longer have distinct roles, but areinstead the products of a larger societal problem, one that is reflected in highcrime areas overpopulated with the poor and minorities. Similarly, research-ers have implied that the presence of high crime schools within high crimecommunities intensifies the level of fear and apprehension experienced bymany students (Lawrence, 1998; McDermott, 1983). In many instances, con-flict emerges as a product of the interdependence between the individual andsocial-contextual forces (Jessor et al., 1996). Since the period of adolescenceis generally marked by rapid change and growth, researchers have argued thatdestructive conflict among these youths will have special consequences de-velopmentally (see Jessor et al., 1996).

With regard to mental health issues, studies based on children raised in

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation, Violent Crime: The Realities and the Myths50

communities where violence occurs have shown that direct encounters withviolence (either as a victim or witness) increase the likelihood of experienc-ing anxieties, depression, social withdrawal, and difficulties in concentrating(Boney-McCoy and Finkelhor, 1995; Farver and Frosch, 1996; Garbarino,1996; Singer et al., 1995; Osofsky, 1995). Research has also suggested thattraumatic events experienced prior to age 11 are three times more likely toresult in Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) than those experienced afterthe age of 12. Further, issues of desensitization and addiction to danger areoften raised in discussions of continual exposure to violence. Alex Kotlo-witz’s (1991) ethnographic study clearly demonstrates the emotional impactof violence by suggesting that many children residing in ‘‘war zone’’ envi-ronments exhibit high levels of fatalism, as seen in their expectations forviolence and death at an early age.

The Urban Stress and Mental Health Model developed by Hector F. Myers(1982) suggests that African-American youth are particularly stress vulner-able because of stress inducing factors, as well as factors relating indirectly toissues of oppression and racism (i.e., class oppression, proliferation of drugs,the use of violence to resolve interpersonal conflicts). Myers (1989) alsoargues that the most socially distressing indicators of mental health problemsamong Black youth are the statistics reflecting the extent to which juveniledelinquency and violence have become a way of life. Research has suggestedthat during childhood, low socioeconomic status serves as one of manyenvironmental factors that can attribute to delinquency and school dropout(National Advisory Mental Health Council, 1995). Further, issues linked tosocietal structures (i.e., high unemployment, inadequate education, and poornutrition) are often overlooked in discussions relating to the distribution ofmental health services to Black youth. Myers (1989) suggests that racismremains an underlying factor in the dismissal of public policy initiatives toaddress many victims of environmental violence. In this vein, the UrbanStress and Mental Health model suggests that services should be aimedtoward the removal of social sources of distress, as opposed to the primaryemphasis on individual disease models. This argument is further supportedby Coll et al. (1996) and Washington and McLoyd (1982), who identifymethodological flaws in research linking person-centered characteristics (i.e.,intelligence, aggressiveness, incomplete sexual identity) and problematic sit-uations, while ignoring situationally-relevant factors (i.e., racism).

DESIGN AND METHOD

Questionnaire Items

The Survey of Violent Victimization was initially developed from pre-vious literature examining the degree to which inner-city high school stu-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Zina T. McGee 51

dents were victimized by threat of or actual firearm attack (for example, seeSheley et al., 1992; Sheley and Wright, 1995). Additional statements pertain-ing to issues of mental health status were also derived from previous litera-ture, particularly as they relate to aspects of post-traumatic stress disorder(for example, see Garabino et al., 1992; Garbarino, 1996; Osofsky, 1995).After deleting several items addressing victimization solely by firearms, thesurvey consisted of 40 items ranging from victimization in general to theimpact of victimization on mental health status.

Mental health status is measured by combining responses relating to psy-chological impairment due to continual exposure to a dangerous environ-ment. Emphasis is placed on the existence of unconscious forces (i.e., resist-ance to sleep, nightmares, dreams of fear) among youth exposed toenvironments characterized by fear. Additional attention is paid to the issuesof desensitization and addiction to violence, which may account for an in-crease in violent behavior among those youths that may have been victimizedthemselves. Prior research has suggested that in some instances, little distinc-tion is found among the victims and perpetrators of violent behavior (seeMcDermott, 1983). With regard to other variables, emphasis is placed onsociodemographic characteristics, exposure to guns and violence in and outof school, and personal violence-related activities (theft, drug usage, weap-ons usage, etc.). The latter set of variables are examined indirectly in thatviolent activity among adolescents may account for actual victimization,which in turn may affect one’s mental health status.

Sample

The analyses reported are based on responses to self-administered ques-tionnaires completed by 200 youth, primarily between the ages of 12 and 18,in the state of Virginia. Census tract data were utilized to obtain a stratifiedsample selected from various school, church, and community organizationsthat service youth in urban areas. In all cases, program directors viewed thetopic of guns and violence among students as highly politically charged. Datawere collected by obtaining assistance from various youth organizations inthree cities in Virginia. Each participating organization services inner-cityyouth in after-school programs. In each instance, students who participated inthe youth organizations attended inner-city schools that had experiencedfirearm incidents in the recent past and had likely encountered gun-relatedviolence (as victims, perpetrators, or bystanders) out of school.

The survey was introduced to students as a regional study of firearms andviolence among youth. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. In mostinstances, the surveys were administered to 20-30 students at a time byprogram directors. Parental consent forms were completed at most sites.Information disseminated to parents focused primarily on the impact of vic-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation, Violent Crime: The Realities and the Myths52

timization on the mental health status of these youth, as well as on issues ofpreventative strategies to curb school violence (i.e., peer mediation, conflictresolution, early intervention).

Missing Data

Results of the survey reveal few problematic areas with regard to missingdata. Subjects were given ample time by the program counselors to completethe questionnaires, and findings indicate that approximately twenty minuteswere required for successful completion of the items. However, results ob-tained from one site reveal a limited number of students completing thequestionnaire, accounting for missing cases within the final segment of theinstrument (i.e., responses pertaining to desensitization to violence and de-gree of fatalism). In an effort to address further issues of missing data,missing cases on several items were contrasted with responding cases con-trolling for research site, race/ethnicity, and age. In addition, all analyseswere repeated substituting predicted values for all missing cases (see Ander-son, Basilevsky, and Hum, 1983).

Reliability and Validity

Self-report data are usually necessary to the study of deviant behavior--in-cluding studies of victimization. Issues of reliability and validity, however,are normally present, and researchers are often faced with the dilemma of notknowing whether their respondents are answering questions in an honest andaccurate fashion.

Efforts to examine reliability in this study focused on responses to anumber of items. For example, respondents who did not believe that Ameri-can society is violent should not have responded to the item addressing thecauses of violence in society. Ten such items were examined in a similarmanner for the sample. Inconsistent responses averaged 1.3 percent within arange of .6 to 2.8 percent. Respondents were scored on a number of contra-dictory answers to determine systematic inconsistencies. Respondents re-ceived scores between 0 and 10. Less than 2 percent scored above 2; no scoreexceeded 5.

Since there were no official records to compare with the self-report data,validity was more difficult to assess. Emphasis was placed on constructvalidation, whereby correlations regarding similar attitudes and behaviorswere compared to correlations between variables known to be related throughprior research findings. For example, respondents who reported high levelsof fear while on school grounds also felt that there was a great deal ofviolence within the school setting (r = .619). Additionally, respondents who

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Zina T. McGee 53

answered affirmatively to the item examining nightmares about violence alsoresponded affirmatively to the item examining difficulties in concentratingdue to violence (r = .437). Since items such as these are normally used asindicators of post-traumatic stress disorder, it appears as though a reasonablelevel of validity exists for the sample. In addition, level of heroin, crack, andregular cocaine was associated with the commission of crimes to gain drugmoney (r ranges between .328 to .414)--a finding consistent with previousresearch (see Chaiken and Chaiken, 1990). Finally, research has shown thatmarijuana has often been cited as a ‘‘gateway’’ drug to heroin, cocaine, andcrack use (Akers, 1992; Goode, 1989). Results from the present sample showthat a high percentage of respondents who have used heroin, cocaine, andcrack have also used marijuana (73, 82, and 81 percent, respectively). In sum,reliability and validity levels appear to fall within acceptable ranges.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Table 1 presents descriptive data on the socio-demographic characteristicsof the student sample. Representative of inner-city school students nationally,the sample was 81 percent black; only 10 percent of the students were white.Fewer students were Hispanic and Native American. Most students werebetween 15 and 18 years of age; the modal grade level was 10th. Fifty-ninepercent of the students were male. The most common living arrangementincluded both parents, followed by those living with mother only (34 per-cent). Thirty-seven percent of the students were employed.

Table 2 presents information on gun possession and carrying behavior.Automatic and semiautomatic handguns were the weapons of choice amongthe students (21 percent), followed by regular handguns (16 percent). Morethan one-third of the students reported carrying guns either outside of thehome or on school grounds. An overwhelming proportion of youth carryingguns to school cited protection as the primary cause (25 percent). Further, asubstantial number reported that they had either paid cash for their gun, orhad obtained it from a family member (9 percent and 6 percent respectively).

In a similar vein, more than one-third of the students reported carryingother weapons either outside of the home or on school grounds (see Table 3).Protection was also cited as the primary reason for carrying a weapon. Thepocket knife appeared to serve as the weapon of preference (10 percent).

The findings in Table 4 also indicate that most types of guns are readilyaccessible to juveniles. Regarding access, 36 percent of the students felt thatthey could obtain a gun ‘‘with no trouble at all.’’ Information was alsogathered on the exposure of the sample to guns, crime, and violence withinthe context of family, friends, and neighborhoods. Two-thirds of the sampleexpressed an awareness of friends and other students carrying guns and other

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation, Violent Crime: The Realities and the Myths54

V Table 1: Sociodemographic Characteristics of Student Sample

Characteristics Students% (N)

Grade (188)

6th grade 17th grade 38th grade 39th grade 1710th grade 2811th grade 2112th grade 27

Age (195)

12 213 1314 1015 1416 1717 1618 1419 1120 221 1

Sex (197)

male 59female 41

Living Arrangement (196)

with both parents 45with mother only 34with father only 9with other relatives 8in a foster home 1in an institution 1with friends 1other 1

Race/Ethnicity (197)

white 10black 81hispanic 7native american 1other 1

Work Status (198)no 63less than 20 hrs/wk 29more than 20 hrs/wk 8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Zina T. McGee 55

V Table 2: Student Gun Possession and Carrying Patterns

Students% (N)

(a) Gun Ownership

regular shotgun 2 (181)sawed-off shotgun 5 (193)revolver (regular handgun) 16 (193)automatic or semi-automatic 21 (194)other 6 (194)

(b) Gun Carrying Outside of Home 38 (194)Gun Carrying on School Grounds 33 (194)

(c) Purpose for Carrying Gun to School

protection 25 (194)holding gun for someone else 5 (194)uses gun to commit crimes 5 (194)uses gun to scare someone 3 (194)uses gun to get back at someone 7 (194)most of r’s friends carry guns 6 (194)r carries gun for status 5 (194)r carries gun for other purpose 2 (194)

(d) Acquisition of Gun

gun was given/loaned by family 4 (195)gun was taken from home without consent 6 (195)gun was given/loaned by friends 6 (194)r paid cash for gun 9 (195)r traded something for gun 2 (195)r found gun 3 (195)r stole gun 5 (195)someone got gun for r 3 (195)r got gun from other source 0 (195)

weapons to school. Further, many of the students grew up in families wherefirearms and gun carrying (particularly handguns) were present (37 percentand 54 percent respectively), and in neighborhoods where drug and guntrafficking occurred (54 percent). Similarly, these students were also fre-quently threatened and victimized by violence. Thirty-seven percent hadbeen threatened with a gun, while 23 percent had been shot at on the way toor from school in the last two years. Many were also threatened and victim-ized with knives and other weapons. While these findings suggest cause forconcern, a greater proportion of these students appear to be indirectly in-fluenced by violence, as suggested by the increased numbers of other youthwho have been threatened and victimized. In this vein, nearly one-half of therespondents reported an awareness of other students being threatened andvictimized on the way to or from school in the past two years. Further, more

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation, Violent Crime: The Realities and the Myths56

V Table 3: Weapon Possession and Carrying Patterns

Students% (N)

(a) Weapon Ownership

gun of some sort 8 (193)pocket knife 10 (193)hunting knife 5 (194)razor 6 (194)brass knuckles 4 (194)club of some sort 1 (194)mace/chemical weapon 2 (194)martial arts weapon 2 (194)other weapon 1 (194)

(b) Weapon Carrying Outside of Home 35 (195)Weapon Carrying on School Grounds 32 (193)

(c) Purpose for Carrying Weapon to School

protection 23 (194)holding weapon for someone 4 (194)uses weapon to commit crimes 3 (194)uses weapon to scare someone 4 (194)uses weapon to get back at someone 3 (194)most of r’s friends carry weapons 4 (194)r carries weapon for status 4 (194)r carries weapon for other purpose 1 (194)

than one-half had been threatened and victimized with other weapons. Final-ly, results show that substantial numbers of students have witnessed violencedirectly, and have also been to parties where guns were carried and fired.

Victimization aside, several studies have also suggested that a history ofjuvenile criminality may have an impact on increased exposure to violence(for example, see McDermott, 1983). Table 5 suggests that roughly one-thirdof the student sample had been involved in personal violence-related activi-ties, particularly those relating to theft, substance abuse, and drug dealing.Regardless of victimization history, 82 percent of the students believed thatAmerica was a violent nation, and cited the media as the primary cause ofsuch violence. Structural issues relating to the community, peers, and schoolwere also viewed as having a significant impact on violence (33, 29, and 28percent, respectively). Finally, with regard to the notion of fatalism, morethan one-third of the students expressed concern for their futures, and indi-cated that they expected to be injured and/or killed before the age of 20. Asignificant proportion also reported the occurrence of violence in theirschools and subsequent fear (58 and 33 percent, respectively).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Zina T. McGee 57

V Table 4: Exposure to Guns, Crime, and Violence

Students% (N)

(a) Gun Accessibility

(196)‘‘How difficult would it be for --no trouble 36you to get a gun if you felt --a little trouble 16that you needed one?’’ --a lot of trouble 19

--impossible 29

(b) Other Students and Weapons

students carrying weapons to school 63 (194)students carrying guns to school 64 (194)

(c) Friends Carrying Guns 65 (195)

(d) Family Carrying Guns 54 (194)

(e) Gun and Drug Trafficking inNeighborhood 53 (194)

(f) Gun Ownership in the Family

handguns in the home 37 (194)rifles in the home 19 (192)shotguns in the home 20 (192)

(g) Respondent’s Victimization History

threatened with a gun 32 (193)shot at with a gun 23 (193)threatened with a knife 27 (193)stabbed with a knife 19 (192)threatened with another weapon 24 (192)injured with another weapon 23 (192)

(h) Victimization of Other Students

other students threatened with a gun 46 (191)other students shot at with a gun 49 (191)other students threatened with a knife 48 (190)other students stabbed with a knife 50 (191)other students threatened with other weapons 62 (178)other students injured with other weapons 52 (192)

r has seen someone shot 47 (192)r has seen someone killed 46 (193)r has seen the murdered body of someone 46 (193)r has been to parties where guns were carried 52 (193)r has been to parties where guns were fired 51 (192)

Table 6 presents information linking the effects of violence to mental healthstatus, particularly as it relates to post-traumatic stress disorder. Results showthat a significant number of students have experienced difficulty at home and atschool as a result of exposure to violent events. More than two-thirds of thestudents reported anxiety and/or depression due to violence, while more than

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation, Violent Crime: The Realities and the Myths58

V Table 5: Perceptions of Violence and Related Activities

Students% (N)

(a) Personal Violence-Related Activities

r has stolen something worth more than $50 31 (192)r has been arrested or picked up by police 23 (193)r has used crack, heroin, and/or cocaine 29 (192)r has used alcohol 41 (192)r has committed a crime with a weapon 20 (191)r has committed a crime with a gun 18 (191)r has worked as a drug dealer 26 (194)

(b) Perceptions of Violence in Society

‘‘Do you believe that America is a violent 82 (188)society?”

media is the primary cause of violence 35 (184)peers/friends are the primary cause of violence 29 (184)school is the primary cause of violence 28 (183)community is the primary cause of violence 33 (183)family is the primary cause of violence 26 (182)other causes of violence 18 (183)

(c) Desensitization to Violence and Degree of Fatalism

‘‘I don’t care what others think of me’’ 44 (171)‘‘My neighborhood is a safe place to live’’ 56 (173)‘‘There is a lot of violence in my school’’’ 58 (173)‘‘I am scared in school most of the time’’ 33 (173)‘‘I like the teachers in my school’’ 57 (170)‘‘I am a good student; I try my hardest’’ 76 (173)‘‘I will be shot while in school’’ 44 (172)‘‘I will be stabbed while in school’’ 40 (171)‘‘I will be shot by the time I am 20’’ 37 (170)‘‘I will be stabbed by the time I am 20’’ 39 (170)‘‘I will be killed by the time I am 20’’ 39 (169)

one-half have experienced problems with their studies due to an impaired envi-ronment. The issue of unconscious forces also emerged as many students ex-pressed problems relating to nightmares and dreams about violence. Thesefindings are consistent with earlier studies documenting impairments in schoolperformance and intellectual development, both of which are due to hostility andwithdrawal experienced by youth who have been continually exposed to violentsituations (for example, see Garbarino et al., 1992).

In an attempt to further support these findings, Tables 7-9 illustrate thedirect linkage between victimization patterns, exposure to violence, and men-tal health status. For example, results in Table 7 indicate strong associationsbetween gun carrying behavior and direct victimization. Similar studies havesuggested that certain violence-related activities can directly influence therisk of victimization (see McDermott, 1983). Further, as with prior research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Zina T. McGee 59

V Table 6: Post -Traumatic Stress Disorderand Violent Events

Students% (N)

‘‘‘I have had difficulty falling asleep 47 (193)because of violence’’

‘‘I have had dreams/nightmares about 52 (193)violence’’

‘‘I have had difficulty concentrating 54 (192)on my studies because of violence’’

‘‘I have had trouble remembering 57 (192)things because of violence’’

‘‘I have felt anxious/depressed 61 (192)because of violence’’

‘‘I have been afraid to leave my home 53 (192)because of violence’’

‘‘I have gotten into fights with my 65 (192)family or friends’’

V Table 7: Zero-Order Correlations Examining Weapon Carryingand Victimization Patterns

CARRYGUN CGUNSCHL CARRYWEA CWEASCHL

SHOTAT .70** .76** .68** .68**

STABBED .70** .71** .64** .63**

INJURED .69** .71** .64** .61**

** Coefficient significant at the .001 level.

(see Garbarino, 1992; Osofsky, 1995), strong associations exist betweenactual victimization and indicators of post-traumatic stress disorder (seeTable 8). Finally, with regard to exposure to violence and fatalism, the find-ings point to moderate associations between direct violence (i.e., witnessing amurder or attending parties where guns are carried) and level of fatalism.Students who have witnessed some violent event are more likely to express aconcern with being injured and/or killed at an early age.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation, Violent Crime: The Realities and the Myths60

V Table 8: Zero-Order Correlations Examining Victimizationand Mental Health Status

SHOTAT STABBED INJURED

SLEEPING .73** .79** .77**

DREAMING .72** .78** .76**

STUDYING .67** .73** .74**

REMEMBER .67** .73** .73**

ANXIOUS .68** .75** .76**

FEARHOME .66** .71** .71**

FIGHTING .68** .73** .73**

**Coefficient significant at the .001 level.

V Table 9: Zero-Order Correlations Examining Exposure to Violenceand Degree of Fatalism

SEENSHOT SEENKILL SEENBODY PARTYGUN GUNSHOT

SHOTSCH .40** .46** .45** .34** .33**

STABSCH .39** .45** .42** .32** .31**

DEADBY20 .36** .43** .42** .32** .29**

STABBY20 .38** .45** .41** .32** .30**

SHOTBY20 .38** .44** .41** .31** .29**

**Coefficient significant at .001 level.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The results of this study support the contention that exposure to communi-ty and school violence has a significant impact on the mental health anddevelopment of inner-city youth. The findings point toward additional re-search examining the distribution of mental health services to inner-cityyouths, which are continually exposed to violence at alarming rates. Furtheremphasis should be placed on the removal of the sources of social distress, inaddition to intervention strategies designed to curb the effects of violence.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Zina T. McGee 61

Aside from mental health issues, these findings also suggest the urgencyof re-structuring many inner-city areas. A vast majority of urban studentsappear to have no trouble finding--or using--high-powered guns. In manyinstances, these guns were obtained from family, friends, or street sources,further exemplifying disturbingly high levels of accessibility. Further, a sig-nificant number of students believe that guns are necessary for protection. Itshould be noted, however, that the notion of ‘‘protection’’ could involvegetting to school safely, avenging a fight, or safeguarding a drug deal. None-theless, one can argue that for many of these young men and women, thecentral city remains a hostile and dangerous place.

The findings generally indicate that victimization among inner-city stu-dents surpasses that of students nationally. While 2 percent of the nation’sstudents report being victimized through violent attacks, nearly 30 percent ofthe students in this sample have been victimized through violent attacks.Results generally suggest that victimization of youth does not ‘‘just occur,’’but instead involves patterned violence. The findings suggest that most of theviolence occurring in schools or in transit to and from schools transpiresbecause students have been exposed to a social environment where guns arepresent, and carrying guns is common; or simply because some studentsengage in behaviors relating to violence (drug sales, weapons carrying).

With regard to policy implications of the present findings, it is suggestedthat greater changes must occur within the larger social situations of those insociety most involved in violence. Inner-city youth do not assume new identi-ties upon entering school grounds. Instead, school-related violence reflectsviolence in the surrounding community. Given the concentration of so muchviolence among inner-city youth, structural and cultural solutions demandsignificant attention.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, A.B., Basilevsky, A. & Hum, D. 1983. ‘‘Missing Data: A Review ofthe Literature.’’ In P. Rossi, J. Wright, and A. Anderson (eds.), Handbook ofSurvey Research, New York: Academic Press.

Akers, R. 1992. Drugs, Alcohol, and Society. Belmont: Wadsworth.Boney-McCoy, S. and Finkelhor, D. 1995. ‘‘Psychological Sequelae of Violent

Victimization in a National Youth Sample.’’ Journal of Consulting and Clini-cal Psychology. 63:726-736.

Brookins, G., Peterson, A. & Brooks, L. 1997. ‘‘Youth and Families in the InnerCity: Influencing Positive Outcomes. In H. Walberg, O. Reyes, & R. Weiss-berg (Eds.), Children and Youth: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. ThousandOaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Coll, C., Crnic, K., Lamberty, G., Wasik, B., Jenkins, R., Garcia, H., and Mc-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation, Violent Crime: The Realities and the Myths62

Adoo, H. 1996. ‘‘An Integrated Model for the Study Of Developmental Com-petencies in Minority Children.’’ Child Development. 67:1891-1914.

Fagan, J., Piper, E., & Moore, M. 1986. ‘‘Violent Delinquents and UrbanYouths.’’ Criminology. 24:439-471.

Fagan, J., Weis, J. & Cheng, Y. 1987. ‘‘Contributions of Victimization to Delin-quency in Inner Cities.’’ Journal Of Criminal Law and Criminology.78:586-613.

Fagan, J., Weis, J, & Cheng, Y. 1990. ‘‘Delinquency and Substance Use AmongInner-City Students.’’ Journal of Drug Issues. 20:351:402.

Farrell, A. & Bruce, S. 1997. ‘‘Impact of Exposure to Community Violence onViolent Behavior and Emotional Distress Among Urban Adolescents.’’ Jour-nal of Clinical Child Psychology. 24:26-43.

Farver, Jo Ann M. and Dominick L. Frosch. 1996. ‘‘L.A. Stories: Aggression inPreschoolers’ Spontaneous Narratives after the Riots of 1992.’’ Child Devel-opment. 67:19-32.

Finkelhor, D. 1997. ‘‘The Victimization of Children and Youth: DevelopmentalVictimology.’’ In Davis, R., Lurigio, A. & Skogan, W. (Eds.), Victims ofCrime. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Garabino, James, Kathleen Kostelny, and Nancy Dubrow. 1992. ‘‘Children inDangerous Environments: Child Maltreatment in the Context of CommunityViolence.’’ In Child Abuse, Child Development and Social Policy, edited by D.Cicchetti and S. Toth, New York: Ablex.

Garabino, J. 1996. ‘‘Youth in Dangerous Environments: Coping With the Conse-quences.’’ In Hurrelmann, K. & Hamilton, S. (Eds.), Social Problems andSocial Contexts in Adolescence: Perspectives Across Boundaries. New York:Aldine de Gruyter.

Gibbs, Jewelle Taylor. 1988. ‘‘The New Morbidity: Homicide, Suicide, Acci-dents, and Life-Threatening Behaviors.’’ In Jewelle Taylor Gibbs (ed.), Young,Black and Male in America: An Endangered Species. New York: AuburnHouse.

Gibbs, Jewelle Taylor. 1989. ‘‘Black Adolescents and Youth: An Update on AnEndangered Species.’’ In Reginald L. Jones (ed.), Black Adolescents. Berke-ley: Cobb and Henry.

Goode, Eric. 1989. Drugs in American Society. New York: Knopf.Greene, Michael B. 1993. ‘‘Chronic Exposure to Violence and Poverty: Interven-

tions That Work for Youth.’’ Crime and Delinquency. 39: 106:124.Hill, H. & Madhere, S. 1996. ‘‘Exposure to Community Violence and African

American Children: A Multidimensional Model of Risks And Resources.’’Journal of Community Psychology. 24: 26-43.

Jessor, R. Donovan, J. & Costa, F. 1996. ‘‘Personality, Perceived Life Chancesand Adolescent Behavior.’’ In Hurrelmann, K. & Hamilton, S. (Eds.), SocialProblems and Social Contexts in Adolescence: Perspectives Across Bound-aries. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Zina T. McGee 63

Kotlowitz, Alex. 1991. There are No Children Here: The Story of Two BoysGrowing Up in the Other America. New York: Doubleday.

Lawrence, R. 1998. School Crime and Juvenile Justice. New York: Oxford Uni-versity Press.

Maguire, Kathleen and Ann L. Pastore (eds.). 1996. Source book of CriminalJustice Statistics. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.Washington, D.C. USPGO, 1997.

McDermott, Joan. 1983. ‘‘Crime in the School and in the Community: Offenders,Victims, and Fearful Youths.’’ Crime and Delinquency. 29:207-282.

McGee, Z. 1996. ‘‘The Violent Victimization Survey.’’ In Jones, R. (Ed.). Hand-book of Tests and Measurements for Black Populations. Hampton, VA: Cobband Henry Publishers.

Myers, H. F. and L. M. King. 1982. ‘‘Stress, Ethnicity, and Social Class: A Modelfor Research with Black Populations.’’ In E.E. Jones and S.J. Korchin (eds.),Minority Mental Health. NY: Praeger Press.

Myers, Hector F. 1989. ‘‘Urban Stress and the Mental Health of Black Youth.’’ InReginald L. Jones (ed.), Black Adolescents. Berkeley: Cobb and Henry.

National Advisory Mental Health Council. 1995. Basic Behavioral Science Re-search for Mental Health: A National Investment. U.S. Department of Healthand Human Services.

Osofsky, Joy D. ‘‘Children Who Witness Domestic Violence: The Invisible Vic-tims.’’ Social Policy Research Report. 9:1-16.

Sampson, R. 1998. ‘‘The Embeddedness of Child and Adolescent Development:A Community-Level Perspective on Urban Violence. In McCord, J. (Ed.).Violence and Childhood in the Inner-City.

Sheley, Joseph F., Zina T. McGee, and James D. Wright. 1992. ‘‘Gun-RelatedViolence in and Around Inner-City Schools.’’ American Journal of Diseasesof Children. 146:677-682.

Sheley, Joseph F. and James D. Wright. 1995. In the Line of Fire: Youth, Guns,and Violence in Urban America. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

Singer, M., Anglin, T., Song, L. and Lunghofer, L. 1995. Adolescents’ Exposureto Violence and Associated Symptoms of Psychological Trauma. Journal ofthe American Medical Association. 273:477-482.

Snyder, Howard N. and Melissa Sickmund. 1997. Juvenile Offenders and Vic-tims: 1997 Update on Violence. Office of Juvenile Justice and DelinquencyPrevention.

Timnick, Lois. 1992. ‘‘Children of Violence. What Happens to Kids Who Learnas Babies to Dodge Bullets and Step Over Corpses on Their Way to School?’’Los Angeles Times Magazine 3:6-12, 14-15.

Tobin, P. & Gorman-Smith, R. 1997. ‘‘Families and the Development of UrbanChildren.’’ In Walberg, H., Reyes, O. & Weissberg, R. (Ed.). Children andYouth: Interdisciplinary Perspectives.

Washington, Ernest D. and Vonnie C. McLoyd. 1982. ‘‘The External Validity ofResearch Involving American Minorities.’’ Human Development. 25:324-339.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Race, Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation, Violent Crime: The Realities and the Myths64

AUTHOR’S NOTES

Zina T. McGee, PhD, is on the staff at Hampton University, Hampton, Virginia.Address correspondence to Dr. Zina T. McGee, 2028 Cunningham Drive, Apart-

ment 202, Hampton, VA 23666.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity O

f Pi

ttsbu

rgh]

at 1

4:45

26

Nov

embe

r 20

14