A correct understanding of the dynamics and mechanisms that make it possible for a woman to become a victim of intra-family violence allows the necessary measures to be taken so that she can escape from the situation of victimization. Emilio C. Viano, President of the International Society of Criminology, defines the victim of an abuse as “any subject injured or that has suffered wrongdoing on the part of others, who perceives herself to be a victim, who shares the experience with others looking for help, assistance and compensation, who is recognized as a victim and who presumably is being helped by public, private or collective agencies/structures”. Before the birth of Anti-Violence Centers it was believed that the awareness of being a victim was the necessary condition for a woman to ask for help. Experience has shown that, in reality, it is the request for help that allows her to begin a process of awareness together with the operators in the Anti-Violence Centers. This reflection has led to the creation of a theoretical model called “The Circular Model of Victimization”. The aim of the research, and which is presented here, was to verify whether the Italian Anti-Violence Centers recognize the Circular Model in the daily operational reality, and thus to ascertain whether this model can be considered a real empirical model, as well as a theoretical explanatory model. In conclusion, the revisited Circular Model of Victimization will be presented, in which it is assumed that the way out of the circuit of violence passes from a first moment of perception of victimization to arrive at a real awareness of the same.

Due to their age and lifestyle, female students in general are at an increased risk of various forms of sexual violence. Particular sociocultural contexts also form the background of gender-based violence in professional and academic structures. Yet despite institutional and legal efforts to protect (potential) survivors of sexual violence from primary (and secondary) victimization, persistent assaults demonstrate the reluctance of organizations and individuals to fully accept women’s experiences as being physically and psychologically harmful. Based on quantitative and qualitative data obtained in the context of the European research project “Gender-Based Violence, Stalking and Fear of Crime”,1 this article presents a comparative analysis of the prevalence of sexual violence, feelings of safety (or a lack thereof) and the reasons for (non-)disclosure for five European countries. A dataset of about 21,000 responses from German, British, Italian, Spanish and Polish students indicates that sexualized violence is a major problem at universities and that it has yet to be recognized as such. This – added to the fact that it is generally suppressed or concealed by universities – makes it society’s problem as well. The article discusses widespread social myths about victims and perpetrators, the role of the new media in victimization, and the issues of universities’ responsibility for their students (through institutional policy and specific responses to incidents of gender-based violence). The results presented here demonstrate the contradictory perceptions that students have in regard to their experiences and the nature of sexualized violence in an academic environment.

The ways in which children appraise and cope with school bullying are likely to influence the long-term outcomes experienced. To examine this possibility, 219 Spanish undergraduate students (73 male, 146 female) aged between 18 and 40, completed an adapted version of the Retrospective Bullying Questionnaire (RBQ; Schäfer et al., 2004) and a distress scale (Rivers, 1999). Results indicated that neither coping strategies reported by victims of bullying nor the match between control appraisal and coping strategy influenced levels of distress experienced as adults. Control, threat and challenge appraisals did, however, influence long-term distress. Explanations for these effects are discussed, and include the possibility that appraisals may directly influence levels of distress and the quality of emotions experienced by victims during the actual bullying episode. Active strategies were perceived by students to be effective in dealing with bullying, whereas those centered on avoiding the conflict, or which involved aggression, were considered ineffective.

There is a small, but growing, body of research investigating peer-victimisation between preschoolers, an age which has been identified as being important both theoretically and practically for the development of interventions. This study compares aggressive and defending behaviour and victim status of preschoolers in three European countries; England, Spain and Italy. The results provide further confirmation that some children behave aggressively towards their peers during preschool in each of the countries studied. There are similarities between preschool children involved in peer-victimisation in the three countries in terms of the roles taken, sex differences and the types of aggressive behaviours used and experienced by the children. There were differences in the profiles of children identified as taking the roles by teachers and peers. Overall, it was found that those children identified by peers or teachers as being aggressive were more likely to be male, rated as physically strong and more likely to be rejected by classmates. Also, in general, the targets of peer-victimisation differed depending on the reporter. Peer-nominated victims were not identifiable in terms of gender, popularity or physical strength. Teacher-nominated victims were more likely to be socially rejected and physically weak. There are several subtle differences between the countries which deserve further investigation. The findings are discussed in relation to furthering our understanding of the development of peer-victimisation in preschools and the need for interventions which address this phenomenon.