Skip Navigation



The European Journal of Public Health Advance Access published online on January 30, 2006
The European Journal of Public Health, doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckl007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
16/3/259    most recent
ckl007v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McAlister, A. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by McAlister, A. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved.
Received November 8, 2004
Accepted November 22, 2005

Article

Acceptance of killing and homicide rates in nineteen nations

Alfred L. McAlister 1 *

1 University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston-School of Public Health, Austin, TX, USA

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Alfred L. McAlister, E-mail: Alfred.L.McAlister{at}uth.tmc.edu


  Abstract

Background: International variation in homicide rates may be attributable to cultural differences in acceptance of moral justifications for killing. The aim of this study is to investigate the relationships between measures of attitudes towards the justification of killing and homicide rates in diverse international populations. Methods: Four studies assessed variations in acceptance of killing among adults and young people in nineteen nations and four areas in the USA. Study 1 (1996-1997) assessed adult attitudes in Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Spain, and Venezuela with personal interviews in major cities. Study 2 (1999-2001) assessed attitudes among high school students in Denmark, Finland, Malta, Mexico, Netherlands, Slovenia, Sweden, Taiwan, and the UK with paper surveys administered in classrooms. Study 3 (2001) used telephone interviews to measure the equivalent attitudes among the US samples nationally and from regions in Texas. Study 4 (2002-2003) used paper surveys in classrooms to measure attitudes among high school students in Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, and the Russian Federation. Results: The acceptance of killing varied significantly among genders and national/regional groups. The mean attitude scores in the four studies combined were significantly correlated with national/regional homicide rates and the amount of variance explained was similar to that for social inequality (GINI). Together the attitude scores and GINI explained 65% of the variance in homicide rates. Conclusion: This study provides evidence that variations in attitudes toward the justification of killing may be related to international differences in homicide rates.

Keywords: cross-cultural; homicide; international; violence.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Epidemiol. Community HealthHome page
P. Vineis and P. Elliott
Why is epidemiology necessary to policy-making?
J Epidemiol Community Health, March 1, 2009; 63(3): 186 - 187.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cross-Cultural ResearchHome page
M. Minkov
Risk-Taking Reproductive Competition Explains National Murder Rates Better Than Socioeconomic Inequality
Cross-Cultural Research, February 1, 2009; 43(1): 3 - 29.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.