Fear of crime (FoC) is commonly understood as an emotionally charged process. Gabriel & Greve (2003) conceptualized it as an individual’s perceived crisis due to the real threat of criminal acts (Gabriel & Greve, 2003: pp. 600-614) . Sundeen & Mathieu (1976) viewed it as a fear of victimization, encompassing an individual’s anxieties about becoming a victim of crime (Sundeen & Mathieu, 1976: pp. 211-219) . Other scholars, such as Merry (1981) , describe FoC as an inward psychological process, presenting a comprehensive definition that encompasses cognitive, emotional, and behavioral dimensions (Merry, 1981: p. 10) . The cognitive aspect involves an individual’s understanding of the risk or susceptibility to crimes, including murder or serious harm (Warr, 1990: pp. 891-907) . The emotional dimension encompasses the fear generated by potential criminal threats (De Donder, Verté, & Messelis, 2005: p. 363) . Behaviorally, it refers to actions such as purchasing firearms, avoiding nocturnal walks, or installing security measures, aimed at diminishing the FoC or enhancing personal security (Covington & Taylor, 1991: pp. 231-249) .

The concept of FoC is nuanced, encompassing multiple levels and dimensions. Schafer, Huebner, & Bynum (2006) have identified several key aspects: First, there’s the fear of criminal behavior itself, manifesting as anxiety over the likelihood of becoming a victim. This can be specific to a particular crime or a general apprehension about criminal acts (Schafer, Huebner, & Bynum, 2006: pp. 285-301) . Second, the reaction to this fear often drives individuals, especially in areas where owning firearms is legal, to adopt precautionary measures such as avoiding solitary nighttime outings, steering clear of poorly lit areas, enhancing home security, and being vigilant of one’s psychological well-being (Drakulich, 2012: pp. 322-355) . Third, fear stemming from past victimization is crucial and noteworthy (Skogan & Maxfield, 1981: pp. 15-23) , including not only personal experiences but also those of close associates like friends and family, which significantly impacts one’s fear levels (Greve, 1998: pp. 277-309) . Fourth, the self-evaluation of public safety and environmental factors plays a significant role. This includes assessing the adequacy of surveillance coverage, lighting, patrolling efficiency, as well as the complexity of community demographics and crime incidence in surrounding areas (Williams, et al., 2000: pp. 1-28) . Previous experiences of fear in certain situations also predispose individuals to similar reactions in the future (Rader, 2004: pp. 689-704) . Additionally, according to Stovic, Fischhoff, & Lichtentien (1987) , FoC encompasses various emotional states and attitudes, ranging from distrust and anxiety about perceived risks to concerns over community dynamics and the public environment (Stovic, Fischhoff, & Lichtentien, 1987: pp. 158-175) . Hence, FoC is a multifaceted concept involving an emotional response to the potential of victimization and the behavioral efforts undertaken to mitigate such fear.

Heath & Gilbert (1996) highlighted the media’s significant influence on societal FoC, attributing this impact to a variety of factors. Key among these are the nature of crime exposure in the media, including coverage of severe violent crimes and property crimes, as well as the media’s demographic targeting, such as focus on ethnic minorities and white-collar workers (Heath & Gilbert, 1996: pp. 25-34) . Schlesinger & Tumber (1994) further analyzed the presentation and interpretation of criminal news through interviews with journalists and editors and case studies. They posited that media reports on certain criminal acts could heighten specific individuals’ FoC, particularly those who follow the news closely, regardless of their personal experiences. They argued that the level of detail in these reports directly correlates with the extent of fear they may provoke (Schlesinger & Tumber, 1994: pp. 221-229) .

Heath (1984) posits that media coverage of serious incidents can escalate FoC within a specific scope. Such reports, initially concentrated over a brief period and evolving from basic outlines to detailed accounts, intensify and become more precise over time. This escalation in the FoC, as the reporting deepens, subsequently influences individuals’ daily behaviors (Heath, 1984: pp. 263-276) .

The nexus between individuals’daily behavior, their living environments, and the FoC constitutes a pivotal focus within the realm of FoC studies. Grounded in routine activity theory, the premise is that crime arises from opportunities for offending that are embedded within the societal matrix of everyday life (Cohen, 2008: pp. 325-353) . Warr (1990) posited that the locus of research on FoC should concentrate on identifying which demographic groups harbor the greatest fear of victimization. Such research should empirically investigate these groups to delineate the environmental features they encounter, unveil potential criminal opportunities within these settings, and elucidate the correlation between such opportunities and the FoC. Moreover, advanced a nuanced approach to analyzing the environment, suggesting that the multifaceted nature of an individual’s surroundings be considered in assessing their FoC. He proposed that discerning specific environmental aspects inducing fear could enhance understanding of the issue (Warr, 1990: pp. 891-907) . In categorizing environments based on their relationship with the FoC, he identified two primary types: “novel” and “unfamiliar”. A novel environment, he argued, could provoke societal FoC (Jackson & Stafford, 2009: pp. 832-847) . Furthermore, the elements of environmental analysis were delineated into objective factors—such as the presence of strangers or the level of darkness—and subjective factors, including the degree of unfamiliarity felt by individuals (Melde, Berg, & Esbensen, 2016: pp. 481-509) .

As theories of daily activities and environmental analysis have evolved, the study of FoC has increasingly incorporated the characteristics of community environments and the individual behavior patterns within these settings. Robinson (1998) suggests that the presence or proximity to a significant number of potential criminals in an area can markedly influence the FoC experienced by community members (Robinson, 1998: pp. 19-32) . For instance, within university settings, students are frequently the primary targets of potential criminal acts by their peers. Consequently, this places all students at heightened risk of victimization, as they are part of the regular activities of these potential offenders. The presence of such individuals within the student body significantly amplifies the overall sense of vulnerability to crime among students.

Warr & Stafford (1998) argued that the FoC inherently implies an individual’s awareness of being at risk of victimization. This is exemplified by situations such as the presence of a serial killer, which elevates the perceived risk of becoming a victim, as individuals might believe they are more susceptible to victimization compared to random crimes. Consequently, distinguishing between the assessment of risk perception and the FoC itself is critical (Warr & Stafford, 1998: pp. 1033) . Ferraro (1996) ’s study on female victims and crimes specifically targeting women expanded upon this discussion by demonstrating a strong correlation between FoC and personal perceptions of risk and victimization (Ferraro, 1996: pp. 667-690) .

In addition to examining risk perception factors, certain studies have concentrated on investigating the perceived factors influencing victimization severity. Nagao & Davis (1980) undertook an empirical investigation into the perceived factors determining victimization severity using simulated judgments. Their findings revealed that prior experience and personal knowledge predominantly influenced individuals’ perceptions of victimization severity. Specifically, individuals with previous experiences of rape crimes perceived the severity of victimization significantly higher than those who had no such experiences (Nagao & Davis, 1980: pp. 190-199) .

Lagrange & Ferraro (1989) utilized a national crime survey to assess the level of FoCand eleven alternative indicators of specific FoCs, examining the relationship between age, gender, and FoC. Their research indicated that both women and the elderly experience a heightened FoC, with women’s perceived risk and fear consistently surpassing that of men, regardless of the fear measurement approach. The FoC among the elderly presents a paradox in terms of age (Lagrange & Ferraro, 1989: pp. 697-720) . Conversely, Sutton & Farrall (2005) challenged the longstanding theory that women inherently fear crime more than men by suggesting that social pressures could skew men’s reported fear levels, implying that, in the absence of gendered societal pressure, men’s fear might be comparable to women’s (Sutton & Farrall, 2005: pp. 212-224) .

Age has consistently been recognized as a crucial factor in the FoC (Fisher & May, 2009: pp. 300-321) . Clememte & Kleiman (1976) conducted a comparative study on FoC between elderly and non-elderly individuals, considering gender, race, socioeconomic status, and community size as primary variables. Their findings indicated that urban elderly respondents exhibited a heightened FoC. However, it is important to note that the elderly population is not uniform; certain segments display extreme fear, while others show relatively little concern (Clememte & Kleiman, 1976: pp. 207-210) . This early observation led to the theory of the paradox of FoC, suggesting variability in fear levels across age groups. Despite previous studies acknowledging this paradox, research into the relationship between age and FoC continues to be a frequent pursuit (Farrall, Gray, & Jones, 2021: p. 35) . Tulloth (2000) emphasized the significance of age as a determinant of FoC, employing both quantitative modeling and qualitative analysis to explore how different age groups perceive this fear. Through his research, Tulloth aims to mitigate FoCamong various age demographics, highlighting the ongoing importance of understanding this dynamic (Tulloth, 2000: pp. 451-467) .

The seminal study on the FoC within a university setting, titled “University FoC: A Study of a Southern University” by McConnell (1997) , categorizes the determinants of FoCinto two main groups (McConnell, 1997: pp. 22-46) . These independent variables encompass student demographics such as race, age, gender, chosen curriculum, involvement in campus activities, academic standing, and the size of their hometown, among others. The multifaceted notion of FoC is quantified through a self-administered scale comprising 17 items. McConnell’s findings illuminate the intricacies surrounding the concept of FoC.

Firstly, the characteristics of a location notably influence students’ FoC; a majority of students report feeling fearful of criminal activity when frequenting particular areas on campus (Caruso, 2011: pp. 455-463) . Secondly, student demographics have a considerable impact on crime apprehension; gender emerges as a significant determinant, with women exhibiting a markedly higher FoC. Beyond gender, individual experiences and the prevalence of specific crimes in one’s hometown also shape students’ perceptions of safety and their FoC (Agostino, Sironi, & Sobbrio, 2013: pp. 724-727) .

Carmen, Polk, Segal, & Bing (2000) conducted a social survey examining students’ FoC, incorporating event variables before and after a crime’s occurrence to ascertain differences in the factors influencing this fear (Carmen, Polk, Segal, & Bing, 2000: pp. 21-36) . The study included 186 students prior to a violent crime event and 374 students afterwards, revealing that students’ field of study significantly impacts their FoC. Specifically, students who majored in criminal justice exhibited a lower FoC compared to their peers in non-criminal justice fields. Additionally, the occurrence of campus crime markedly influenced students’ fear levels: prior to a campus violent crime, 31.7% of students expressed fear of violent crime, which increased to 41.2% after such an incident (Price, Evans, & Bates, 2003: pp. 91-109) .

This study focuses on a university in Shenzhen City, selecting 179 participants from the faculties of finance, law, and adult education for an anonymous questionnaire survey and before the questionnaire survey, read out the ethical requirements and informed consent to the respondents. The sample includes 59 individuals from the finance faculty, 60 from the law school, and 60 from the adult education faculty. The questionnaire comprises two sections, consisting of a total of 34 closed-ended and anonymous questions. The primary questions utilize a scoring model based on degrees, where participants rate their fear level on a scale from 1 to 5.

The cognitive-emotional measurement method assesses an individual’s FoC by analyzing their understanding of and emotional reactions to crime. This approach is widely adopted in both domestic and international research, characterized by unique problem settings (Otis, 2007: pp. 198-217) . Key survey questions include “whether individuals feel comfortable walking alone at night” and “their sense of security when alone at home,” which are pivotal in gauging FoC (Ferraro & Grange, 1987: pp. 70-97) . Notably, this method was employed by the Ministry of Public Security in China for public security surveys conducted in 1991, 1994, and 2004. The research on cognitive-emotional measurement methods has spurred advancements and refinements in methodological approaches. Beyond the primary issues, this method also evaluates FoC through perceived fear levels towards various crime types, such as fraud, robbery, murder, sexual assault, stalking, and theft (Ferraro & Grange, 1992: pp. 233-244) .

In this study, the data will undergo cross-checking and be analyzed using an independent sample t-test in accordance with the research hypothesis to determine whether there is a significant relationship.

This research have four hypothesis as follows:

Research Hypothesis 1 mentioned that this study investigates whether gender differences significantly impact students’ FoC across various types of criminal acts.

Research Hypothesis 2 explores whether experiences related to victimization significantly affect students’ FoC across various criminal activities. Previous studies indicate that experiencing victimization does not consistently result in significant differences in an individual’s FoC.

Research Hypothesis 3 posits that the impact of crime data and media news attention on students’ FoC might vary significantly across different types of criminal acts. Given that news media attention and its potential over-reporting have consistently been significant variables in numerous studies, the shift in students’ media consumption patterns toward more dispersed and less engaged interaction raises questions about the continued influence of news media on perceptions of crime.

Research Hypothesis 4 posits a significant relationship between students’ behavior, specifically their tendency to avoid poorly lit areas, and their FoC.

First and foremost, gender emerges as a predominant factor in discussions surrounding the influence on FoC. Across various types of crime under investigation, female students consistently exhibit higher levels of fear compared to their male counterparts. This disparity is particularly pronounced in the context of sexual crimes, as evidenced by the average values. Such findings underscore the critical and consistent role of gender as a pre-exist determinant in shaping FoC of student. Secondly, the impact of victimization-related experiences on students’ fear of various criminal acts revealed no significant effect. This finding aligns with Young (1992) , who pointed out that some victimization experiences do not alter the individual’s fear of encountering similar crimes in the future, illustrating a paradox in FoC (Young, 1992: pp. 419-441) . Furthermore, traditional media no longer plays a significant role in shaping students’ FoC. The shift towards self-media, including casually consumed news and mobile applications, marks a changing landscape.

From the data obtained from the analysis of this study, we can see that among the antecedents of college students’ FoC, gender and victimization-related experiences should be paid more attention to. When facing college students or engaging in work related to college students’ safety, we should first pay more attention to female college students, and formulate corresponding help measures to create a brighter and safer environment, so that women’s FoC under the influence of gender will not be too prominent, which will affect the efficiency of female college students. Secondly, among college students, the experience of direct victimization accounts for a small proportion after all, and its data expression of college students’ FoC is not particularly obvious. However, there is a paradox in this antecedent variable, so we should include indirect victimization, mainly pay attention to the FoC brought to college students by the abnormal spread of victimization experience and its impact on efficiency, establish relevant mechanisms, promptly guide the direct victims, and block the indirect victimization experience that may cause discomfort in time.