A Brief Introduction of New Methods to Investigate the Mismatch between indicators of “Fear of Crime” Over Time

Abstract

The concept of “fear of crime” (FOC) has occupied much of the criminological literature since the 1960s. The relevance of the concept is made manifest when confronted with the apparent functional disconnection of this phenomenon with real, or “objective” crime. To put it simply - societies rated as “very safe” (according to a fixed set of parameters) have been reported to be perceived by the subjects as “very threatening”, and vice versa. Whereas the methods that we present in this study would become an innovation in the field of experimental criminology [1], the critical perspective of the precision and validity of previous investigations of FOC on which this line of research builds refers back to the foundational work of ie., [2] or [3], who pointed out that most of the confusion in the discussion was due to the lack of distinction between the emotion (what we feel, or experience) and the cognition (what we think) of FOC. As such, the concept of FOC is very likely to bear different conclusions depending on whether the approach of the study is emotional, or cognitive [4,5]. In the following research protocol, we will conceive the emotion of fear as “a distinctive mental state, a feeling state, which includes physical responses that prompt or restrain motivated behaviour" [6]. That is, exploring fear as a strictly emotional phenomenon, even if it might be processed as part of mental dynamics of a more cognitive nature. Exploring the emotional aspects of fear would allow us to reliably measure the physiological correlates of fear that have so far been identified, such as the activation of the autonomous nervous system, or a disturbance in the digestive, respiratory or cardiovascular apparati, among others [7,8]. Additionally, we will investigate processes of memory encoding, retention, and recall in situations in which subjects experience fear. This will not only add to the available data, but also help us interpret previous data by tracking the development of experiences of FOC as a function of processes of memory in the subject, departing from a naturalistic "seed experience" [9].