skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 141263 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Journal: Criminal Justice Research Bulletin  Volume:7  Issue:5  Dated:(1992)  Pages:1-8
Author(s): H Toch
Date Published: 1992
Page Count: 8
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Type: Survey
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This discussion of "politically correct" approaches to violence and aggression charges that approaches which ought to be regarded as controversial are instead held to be noncontroversial.
Abstract: A review of the "politically correct" approaches to violence and aggression identifies the movement of the dominant view of violence causation from norms to genes, considers the perspective of the politically correct violence research-advocacy groups, and describes the way participants in violence can become politically correct research subjects and provide politically correct testimony. At the time of the Violence Commission, the subculture of violence perspective was the dominant view. This perspective shifted, and, currently, the dominant views favors individual differences, genes, and heritability. Violence research-advocacy groups, which tend to be politically correct, mostly are concerned about male aggressors and want to rescue and "empower" victims and to punish and/or retain aggressors. They perceive research as contributing to this effort and, to assist their advocacy role, frequently rely on methods of inquiry that are designed to encourage the recall of the types of victimization experiences that are of interest to their group. The article concludes with several possible explanations of the reasons why mainline violence theorists are reviving once discredited perspectives, particularly biomedical ones. 10 notes and 35 references
Main Term(s): Political influences; Violence
Index Term(s): Aggression; Child Sexual Abuse; Crime causes theory; Social change
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.