Communities, Streets, and People: A Multi-level Study of the Correlates of Victimization.

The current study adds the context of the immediate microgeographic environment (measured as the street segment) to the study of individual victimization. Using residential survey and physical observation data collected on 449 street segments nested within 53 communities in Baltimore, MD, we employ multilevel logistic regression models to examine how individual risky lifestyles, the microgeographic context of the street, and community level measures influence self-reported property and violent crime victimization. Results confirm prior studies that show that risky lifestyles play a key role in understanding both property and violent crime victimization, and community indicators of disadvantage play a role in explaining violent crime victimization. At the same time, our models show that the street segment (micro-geographic) level adds significant explanation to our understanding of victimization, suggesting that three level models should be used in explaining individual victimization. The impact of the street segment is particularly salient for property crime.

COVID-19 health practices and attitudes in the United States: the role of trust in healthcare.

Aim: Individual-level COVID-19 vaccination and related preventive health behaviors is politically polarized in the United States. We examined whether the current polarization in COVID-19 health behavior may be explained by differences in trust in healthcare, locus of control, or insurance status. Subject and methods: Our sample includes 553 US adults recruited on Amazon MTurk. We assessed odds ratios of currently vaccinated, or willing to be vaccinated if unvaccinated using logistic regression. We assessed count of routine changes and positive attitudes toward facemasks using negative binomial regression. Results: Trust in healthcare was found to be an important determinant of all COVID-19 related health behavior measured in our study. Further, the effects on COVID-related attitudes/behavior from trust in healthcare are large in magnitude. For instance, our results suggest that individuals at or above the upper quartile of trust in healthcare are around 20 percentage points more likely to be vaccinated than those at or below the lower quartile. Further, we find that the effect of trust in healthcare on adherence or endorsement of COVID-19 mitigation strategies is distinct from political affiliation, i.e., the effect on COVID-19 related health behavior is independent of the polarization across political party lines. Locus of control was not associated with adherence/attitude toward COVID-19 mitigation strategies. Insurance status was only found to be positively associated with odds of being vaccinated. Conclusion: Our study highlights the importance of increasing trust in healthcare as a means to protect public health in the wake of major public health crises. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10389-022-01737-9.

Enhancing Informal Social Controls to Reduce Crime: Evidence from a Study of Crime Hot Spots.

There is growing evidence that crime is strongly concentrated in micro-geographic hot spots, a fact that has led to the wide-scale use of hot spots policing programs. Such programs are ordinarily focused on deterrence due to police presence, or other law enforcement interventions at hot spots. However, preliminary basic research studies suggest that informal social controls may also be an important mechanism for crime reduction on high crime streets. Such research has been hindered by a lack of data on social and attitudinal characteristics of residents, and the fact that census information is not available at the micro-geographic level. Our study, conducted in Baltimore, MD, on a sample of 449 residential street segments, overcame these limitations by collecting an average of eight surveys (N = 3738), as well as physical observations, on segments studied. This unique primary data collection allowed us to develop the first direct indicators of collective efficacy at the micro-geographic level, as well as a wide array of indicators of other possible risk and protective factors for crime. Using multilevel negative binomial regression models, we also take into account community-level influences, and oversample crime hot spots to allow for robust comparisons across streets. Our study confirms the importance of opportunity features of streets such as population size and business activity in understanding crime, but also shows that informal social controls, as reflected by collective efficacy, are key for understanding crime on high crime streets. We argue that it is time for police, other city agencies, and NGOs to begin to work together to consider how informal social controls can be used to reduce crime at residential crime hot spots.

Does Collective Efficacy Matter at the Micro Geographic Level?: Findings from a Study Of Street Segments.

Many scholars argue that collective efficacy is not relevant to understanding crime at the microgeographic level. We examine variation in collective efficacy across streets with different levels of crime in Baltimore City, MD, and, then, employ multilevel modelling to assess this relationship. We find that people who live in crime hot spots have much lower levels of collective efficacy than people who live in non-hot spot streets and that this relationship persists when controlling for a large number of potential confounders both at the street and community levels. These findings suggest the importance of collective efficacy both in understanding and controlling crime at microgeographic units.

Poor Health and Violent Crime Hot Spots: Mitigating the Undesirable Co-Occurrence Through Focused Place-Based Interventions.

INTRODUCTION: The geographic overlap of violence and poor health is a major public health concern. To understand whether and how place-based interventions targeting micro-geographic places can reduce this undesirable co-occurrence, the study addresses 2 important questions. First, to what extent are deteriorated health conditions associated with living at violent crime hot spots? Second, through what mechanisms can focused place-based interventions break the association between living with violence and deteriorated health? METHODS: This study used survey data from 2,724 respondents living on 328 street segments that were categorized as violent crime hot spots (181 segments with 1,532 respondents) versus non-hot spots (147 segments with 1,192 respondents) in 2013-2014 in Baltimore, Maryland. Propensity score analysis assessed whether individuals living at violent crime hot spots had lower general health perceptions than people living at non-hot spots. Marginal structural models estimated the proportion of total effects mediated by 3 theoretically informed intervening mechanisms. Analyses were conducted in 2019. RESULTS: Respondents living at violent crime hot spots had a lower level of self-rated general health (b= -0.096, 95% CI= -0.176, -0.015) and higher levels of health limitations (b=0.068, 95% CI=0.027, 0.109) and problems (OR=2.026, 95% CI=1.225, 3.349) than those living at non-hot spots. Enhanced perceptions of safety, collective efficacy, and police legitimacy may break the association between living in places with extremely high levels of violence and deteriorated health. CONCLUSIONS: Indicated or selective strategies are urgently needed to target micro-geographic locations with known increased risks, supplementing universal strategies applied to a broader community.

Hot Spots of Crime are Not Just Hot Spots of Crime: Examining Health Outcomes at Street Segments.

In this paper we seek to identify whether the relationship between health disparities and crime occurs at a micro geographic level. Do hot spot streets evidence much higher levels of mental and physical illness than streets with little crime? Are residents of crime hot spots more likely to have health problems that interfere with their normal daily activities? To answer these questions, we draw upon a large National Institutes of Health study of a sample of hot spots and non-hot spots in Baltimore, Maryland. This is the first study we know of to report on this relationship, and accordingly we present unique descriptive data. Our findings show that both physical and mental health problems are much more likely to be found on hot spot streets than streets with little crime. This suggests that crime hot spots are not simply places with high levels of crime, but also places that evidence more general disadvantage. We argue that these findings have important policy implications for the targeting of health services and for developing proactive prevention programs.

Understanding the role of service providers, land use, and resident characteristics on the occurrence of mental health crisis calls to the police.

Similar to concentrations of crime, mental health calls have been found to concentrate at a small number of places, but few have considered the context of places where mental health calls occur. The current study examines the influence of the physical and social context of street segments, particularly the role of service providers, land use features of the street and nearby area, and characteristics of residents on the likelihood of a mental health crisis call to the police occurring on the street. The findings demonstrate that the social context, such as offending and drug use among residents, levels of social cohesion and community involvement, and drug and violent crime influenced the occurrence of mental health crisis calls. Findings from this study make theoretical and practical contributions to a number of disciplines by improving our understanding of where mental health crisis calls occur and why they are found at specific places.

Perspectives of people with mental health problems at hot spots: Attitudes and perceptions of safety, crime, and the police.

People who live in places with high levels of crime and disorder are more likely to experience mental illness compared with those who do not live in these types of place (Weisburd et al., 2018; Weisburd & White, 2019). The increased police presence on high crime streets may also increase the likelihood that these individuals will encounter law enforcement. There is a strong body of literature focused on the relationship between neighborhoods and the physical and mental health of residents (e.g. Arcaya et al., 2016; Duncan & Kawachi, 2018; Leventhal & Brooks-Gunn, 2003), but there are very few studies that look at the perceptions of people with mental illness directly, particularly as they relate to the environment of the street on which they live and attitudes toward the police. In turn, existing studies generally look at the most serious mental health problems (e.g. schizophrenia), ignoring more common mental health concerns such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression. This paper uses self-report data from a large in-person survey of people who live on crime hot spot and non-hot spot streets in order to assess attitudes among a broader group of persons with mental health problems. Furthermore, we examine the interaction between living in crime hot spots and non-hot spots and perceptions of these residents. Our findings in this broader sample confirm earlier studies that identify greater fear and less trust of the police among persons with mental illnesses. At the same time, our findings suggest that fear of crime and perceptions of police are moderated by living in a crime hot spot.

Mean Streets and Mental Health: Depression and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder at Crime Hot Spots.

This study explores the relationship between mental health and place at microgeographic units of analysis. We examine self-reported symptomology for depression and PTSD for 2,724 survey respondents interviewed in three types of randomly selected street segments: violent crime hot spots, cool spots, and cold spots. We find that the mean symptomology score is 61% higher for depression in violent crime hot spots than cold spots, and 85% higher for PTSD. Overall, we estimate that 14.8% of residents of violent crime hot spots meet thresholds for moderate depression or a diagnosis of PTSD. This can be compared to only 6.5% of residents at the cold spots. Using PSM and weighted negative binomial regression approaches we show that observable selection factors are not responsible for the relationships identified. Examining geographic influences, we find an important area effect of violent crime for both mental health measures, and an additional impact of the specific street of residence for PTSD.

Prisoners' assessments of mental health problems among their children.

High rates of imprisonment among American men and women have motivated recent research on the well-being of children of incarcerated parents. Despite advances in the literature, little is known regarding the mental health status of children who experience maternal relative to paternal incarceration. Accordingly, we examine whether there are differences in mental health needs among children of incarcerated parents. Specifically, we assess whether incarcerated mothers are more likely than incarcerated fathers to report that their children suffer from mental health problems. Using cross-sectional data on children (N = 1,221) compiled from a sample of parents confined in the Arizona Department of Corrections, we find that children of incarcerated mothers are significantly more likely to be identified as suffering from mental health problems. This effect remained even after controlling for additional parent stressors and child risk factors such as exposure to violence, in utero exposure to drugs/alcohol, and parental mental illness. Policy implications and directions for future research are discussed.