10.3886/ICPSR09479.v2 Davis, Robert C. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research 1991 anxiety coping counseling emotional states fear fear of crime guilt personal adjustment psychological effects psychological wellbeing treatment victimization victims victim services 1991-07-18 2006-01-18 1984 1985 survey data 9479 2 This data collection was designed to examine the effectiveness of a New York City agency's attempt to decrease the negative emotions that result from victimization. The data address the following questions: (1) To what extent do specific treatments mitigate the negative psychological impact of victimization? (2) Are individuals from a particular demographic group more prone to suffer from psychological adjustment problems following victimization? (3) When victimized, do individuals blame themselves or the situation? (4) Are some crimes more difficult to cope with than others? (5) Does previous victimization affect the likelihood that an individual will have difficulty coping with current as well as future victimization? Data were collected in two waves, with Wave 1 interviews completed within one month of the victimization incident and Wave 2 interviews completed three months after treatment. The effects of three treatments were measured. They included: traditional crisis counseling (which incorporates psychological aid and material assistance such as food, shelter, cash, etc.), cognitive restructuring (challenges to "irrational" beliefs about the world and one's self used in conjunction with crisis counseling), and material assistance only (no psychological aid provided). A fourth group of victims received no treatment or services. Three standardized psychometric scales were used in the study. In addition to these standardized scales, the initial assessment battery included an index of fear of crime as well as an index that measured behavior adjustment. Another set of measures assessed how victims perceived their experience of victimization and included items on self-blame, selective evaluation, and control. Also included were questions about the crime and precautions taken to guard against future victimization. The follow-up assessment battery was virtually identical to the initial battery, except that questions about services and social support received by the victim were added. The following demographic variables are included in the data: sex, age, marital status, education, income, and race. The unit of analysis was the individual.