Citation

Pridemore WA. Violence Vict. 2002; 17(2): 127-156.

Affiliation

University of Oklahoma, Department of Sociology, Norman 73019, USA. pridemore@ou.edu

Copyright

(Copyright © 2002, Springer Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

12033551

Abstract

This article reviews what we have learned about social structure and homicide during the last 30 years, paying close attention to empirical tests of subculture, strain (both absolute and relative deprivation), and social disorganization theories. First, this review reveals that researchers have difficulty operationalizing culture in terms of values and instead often rely on regional location or group membership as a proxy for subculture. Though the findings relating subculture to homicide are inconsistent, however, culture should not be ignored. Second, the positive relationship between poverty and the spatial distribution of homicide rates is the most consistent finding in this literature, while empirical evidence of the effects of inequality on homicide is neither as strong nor as consistent. Finally, social disorganization is more consistent in explaining the variation of homicide rates than the subcultural and relative deprivation models, with elements of disorganization such as city size, family disruption, and heterogeneity all showing relatively consistent effects.

Language: en