Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605211042601
Journal of Interpersonal Violence
1 –20
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/08862605211042601
journals.sagepub.com/home/jiv
Original Research
Perceptions of Stalking:
Examining Perceivers’
Country of Origin,
Perpetrator-Target
Prior Relationship, and
the Mediating Effect of
Victim Responsibility
Kai Li Chung 1 and Lorraine Sheridan 2
Abstract
Research in stalking perceptions has shown certain relational biases, in which
people tend to view ex-partner stalkers to be less dangerous than stranger
or acquaintance stalkers. These findings are in direct contrast to those of
real-life cases whereby ex-partner stalkers pose a greater threat. In addition,
although stalking is recognized as a global social problem, most studies have
been based on samples drawn from Western, educated, industrialized,
rich, and democratic countries. The current study examined whether the
prior relationship between the stalking perpetrator and target influences
people’s perceptions of stalking and whether cross-national differences exist
between participants based in Malaysia (where there is currently no law that
criminalizes stalking) and England (where stalking has been outlawed since
1997). In a 3 × 2 between-subjects design, 294 Malaysian participants and
170 English participants were presented with a vignette describing a stalking
scenario in which the perpetrator was depicted as a stranger, acquaintance,
or ex-partner. Participants judged the extent to which the perpetrator’s
behavior constitutes stalking; necessitates police intervention; would cause
Corresponding Author:
Kai Li Chung, University of Reading Malaysia, Nusajaya, Johor 79200, Malaysia.
Email: k.chung@reading.ac.uk
2Curtin University, Bentley, WA, Australia
1 University of Reading Malaysia, Nusajaya, Johor, Malaysia
2 Journal of Interpersonal Violence
the victim alarm or personal distress; would cause the victim to fear the
use of violence; and can be attributed to encouragement on the part of the
victim. Results showed that typical relational biases existed in both samples,
but Malaysian participants were less likely than their English counterparts to
label any harassing scenario as serious. Perceptions of victim responsibility
were found to mediate the effect of prior relationship and nationality on
participants’ perceptions. The findings point to the urgency of better cross-
cultural understanding of harassment behavior as well as legislations against
stalking.
Keywords
stalking, harassment, domestic violence, perceptions of violence, legal
intervention, cultural contexts
Introduction
Stalking Victimization and Perpetration
Unlike most crimes, stalking is not a single act, but a series of behaviors car-
ried out over a period of time (Spitzberg & Cupach, 2007). Behaviors that do
not break the law and are seemingly harmless when performed separately
(e.g., phone calls, gift-giving, or texting) can be regarded as threatening when
they escalate in frequency, duration, and intensity (Sinclair & Frieze, 2000).
As such, stalking is easy to commit, but difficult to define and prosecute, in
part because people vary in their judgments of how acceptable various intru-
sive behaviors are (Sheridan et al., 2019). While there is no single legal defi-
nition of stalking, the term generally refers to a pattern of unwanted and
repeated attention, harassment, contact, or any other course of conduct that
is intentionally directed at a specific person or group that would cause a
reasonable person to feel fearful or threatened (Spitzberg & Cupach, 2007).
Stalking is known to be a widespread phenomenon around the world.
While it is challenging to obtain accurate data on the prevalence of stalking
due to inconsistencies in definitions, estimates of lifetime prevalence are gen-
erally similar across Western countries, including the United Kingdom,
United States, and Canada, ranging between 7% and 36% in females, and 2%
and 29% in males (see review by Spitzberg & Cupach, 2014). The adverse
physical, psychological, social, and financial impacts of stalking on victims
and their close others cannot be underestimated (Morewitz, 2003). A number
of studies have reported an elevated risk of negative mental health outcomes,
Chung and Sheridan 3
such as depression and post-traumatic stress (Bailey & Morris, 2018). Earlier
research has shown that stalking often precedes fatal or near fatal violence
(McFarlane et al., 1999). There are also considerable economic conse-
quences, which may be attributed to productivity loss, property damage,
medical treatment, and legal services (Peterson et al., 2018).
It appears that there is a high rate of self-identified stalking victimization.
Due to the widespread nature of stalking and its negative consequences,
researchers have sought to identify factors that may predict perpetration of
stalking and help explain the behavior (Ménard & Pincus, 2012).
Psychopathology has been referred to as a driving cause of stalking perpetra-
tion in some cases, and other reported nonclinical risk factors include child-
hood trauma, attachment anxiety, and personality characteristics (Dye &
Davis, 2003; Nijdam-Jones et al., 2018). Higher rates of substance use have
also been associated with increases in violent behavior and recidivism among
stalking offenders (Rosenfeld, 2004). Understanding the link between moti-
vations underlying the offending behavior has clinical utility, but it also raises
awareness of stalking among criminal justice officials, victim service profes-
sionals, and the general public.
Perceptions of Stalking
One particular area that has received considerable research attention is per-
ceptions of stalking. Much empirical work has sought to identify personal
and situational factors that influence people’s perceptions of stalking; prior
relationship between the perpetrator and the victim is one such factor that has
repeatedly shown an influence (Scott et al., 2014; Scott & Sheridan, 2011).
The methodology in perception research typically involves manipulating
stalking vignettes (i.e., scenarios that portray a particular pattern of conduct
that may or may not constitute stalking) to assess individuals’ judgments of
case severity as well as pursuer and victim culpability (for a review see Scott,
2020). It has been demonstrated that the greater the degree of prior intimacy
between the stalker and the victim, the less likely people are to view a harass-
ing situation as being serious. For instance, Scott and Sheridan (2011) exam-
ined three relational subtypes of stalkers (stranger, acquaintance, and
ex-partner) and found that United Kingdom university students were more
likely to judge harassing behavior as constituting stalking and call for police
intervention and/or criminal charges when the behavior was performed by a
stranger as opposed to an ex-partner. Participants in this study also tended to
believe that a target would experience more alarm or distress when the
4 Journal of Interpersonal Violence
harasser and target were portrayed as strangers. However, such perceptions
often do not reflect the reality that stalkers are more likely to be ex-partners
than strangers or acquaintances, and that ex-partner stalkers are often more
persistent and dangerous than stranger or acquaintance stalkers (McEwan et
al., 2009; Spitzberg, 2002). In addition, in a study by Sheridan and Roberts
(2011), it was found that an abusive prior relationship between the victim and
the stalker predicted physical assault.
A body of research (Cass & Mallicoat, 2015; Cass & Rosay, 2012) has
also demonstrated that the nature of the perpetrator-victim prior relationship
influences people’s perceptions of the criminal justice process in stalking
cases. In these studies, university students tended to believe that relationship
status would impact victim reporting as well as authorities’ arrest and inves-
tigative decisions. The bias toward judging stalking situations as less serious
and victims as more responsible in cases where perpetrators are ex-partners
as opposed to strangers or acquaintances has been shown to exist even
among police officers. For example, Sheridan et al. (2016a) found that police
officers had a higher tendency to consider harassment behavior as stalking,
requiring police involvement, and causing the victim alarm and fear of vio-
lence when the perpetrator was a stranger instead of an ex-partner. Notably,
policing experience played a role; officers with direct experience with stalk-
ing-related investigations (Weller et al., 2013) and specialist officers who
had prior training in interpersonal violence cases (Scott et al., 2013) were
generally less likely than nonexperienced and nonspecialist officers to blame
the victim for such situations. Such relational biases resonate with findings
from the violent crime literature, particularly in relation to victim-blaming
attributions. According to a review by van der Bruggen and Grubb (2014),
earlier works have indicated that stranger rape victims are blamed more than
acquaintance rape victims, but in more recent studies it appears that victims
are apportioned greater blame in date or acquaintance rape cases than in
stranger rape cases. The inconsistent findings are likely due to the use of
different manipulations in the vignette methodology. The impact of marital
rape on victims, on the other hand, is consistently minimized in the litera-
ture. It can generally be concluded that the better the perpetrator and victim
know each other, the higher the likelihood that blame will be assigned to
victims of violence.
Misperceptions the public hold about stalking behavior, if left unad-
dressed, may lead to a lack of demand for policy and social change. The fact
that the common misperception that ex-partner stalkers present a lesser threat
to their victims’ personal safety than acquaintance and stranger stalkers is
apparent among police officers is problematic, as this may impact their deci-
sion-making about the seriousness of stalking cases. It is thus critical to
Chung and Sheridan 5
identify contexts that contribute to common misperceptions so that such
misperceptions can be challenged through appropriate awareness and train-
ing programs.
Stalking Across Cultures
While stalking is recognized as a global issue, the majority of prior research
has been based on samples drawn from Western, educated, industrialized,
rich, and democratic (WEIRD) countries (Henrich et al., 2010), where
stalking is typically considered a criminal offence. Studies conducted
within the Asia region remains limited, except in Japan (Chapman &
Spitzberg, 2003), Singapore (Sheridan et al., 2019), Hong Kong, and China
(Chan & Sheridan, 2020).
The very few studies conducted in Asia have proposed that cultural values
and practices may have an influence on people’s perceptions of stalking. For
example, in the study by Chapman and Spitzberg (2003), more American
than Japanese students who had been “persistently pursued” perceived them-
selves as being subjected to stalking, but more Japanese than Americans con-
sidered the intrusive behaviors as threatening. It was put forward that the
difference between the collectivism of Japanese society and the individual-
ism of American society may play a role; being group-centered, the Japanese
may have a preference to avoid conflict and hence be more hesitant to report
such intrusive behaviors.
According to a study conducted among young women across 12 countries
(Armenia, Australia, England, Egypt, Finland, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan,
Portugal, Scotland, and Trinidad), people’s reported experience of intrusive
behavior varied depending on national levels of gender empowerment—a
measure of women’s societal power (Sheridan et al., 2016b). It was found
that women from countries with lower gender empowerment scores (e.g.,
Egypt, Indonesia) reported having experienced arguably more sinister intru-
sions (e.g., forced sexual contact, death threats, being spied upon), whereas
women from countries with higher gender empowerment and individualism
scores reported having experienced activities that are typically seen as rela-
tively innocuous (e.g., being offered a drink by a stranger, being asked for
casual sex at a social event). Such findings were in line with literature
(Archer, 2006) that suggests that women from collectivists societies tend to
have lower societal power, making them more vulnerable to male-perpe-
trated violence.
It seems evident that cross-cultural and/or cross-national variations in
people’s perceptions and experiences of stalking will exist, and as such, more
cross-cultural data should be collected to gain more nuanced insights. The
6 Journal of Interpersonal Violence
present study examined perceptions of stalking among student and commu-
nity samples in Malaysia (where there is currently no law that criminalizes
stalking) and England (where stalking has been outlawed since 1997).
Stalking in Malaysia and England
Current data on the prevalence and incidence of stalking in Malaysia are
compiled largely by nongovernmental charitable organizations that work
with abuse victims. According to estimates by the Women’s Aid Organisation
in Malaysia, approximately 26% of 900,000 domestic violence survivors in
Malaysia have been stalked by their abusers (Women’s Aid Organisation,
2013). This reported figure, while anecdotal, appears to be consistent with
statistics in other countries (Spitzberg & Cupach, 2014).
While many countries have either specific anti-stalking laws (e.g., Canada,
Japan) or incorporated stalking into their respective criminal codes (e.g.,
Germany, India), stalking has yet to be made a crime in Malaysia. For this
reason, there is little that the authorities can do when a victim of stalking
makes a police report, even if an investigation takes place. The 2017 amend-
ments to the Domestic Violence Act 1994, which have included improved
protection orders for victims and a widened definition of domestic violence,
do offer some form of protection to stalking victims. Under this act, commit-
ting any form of violence against a spouse, a former spouse, or a family
member counts as domestic violence, which is an offence. However, this act
does not apply if the perpetrator is not related or married to the victim, or if
the victim is unable to prove obvious injuries.
In England and Wales, the Protection from Harassment Act was introduced
in 1997 to recognize stalking as a crime, but “stalking” was not specifically
named in said legislation. The Protection of Freedoms Act (2012) extended
this earlier legislation to include two new offences, namely “stalking” and
“stalking involving fear of violence,” purportedly to distinguish between a
behavior that constitutes a low-level harassment offence and a higher-level
offence that causes fear of violence or serious distress to the victim.
A recent report by the Crown Prosecution Service (2020) in England and
Wales revealed that the number of recorded charges in the last two years more
than doubled the number five years previously, with most cases committed
by ex-partners. It was postulated that the rise in number of charges is partly
because police and prosecutors are better able to recognize stalking as a part
of a wider pattern of domestic abuse. This seems to suggest that better aware-
ness of stalking offences directly impacts prevention and intervention efforts.
Chung and Sheridan 7
The Present Study
This study examined whether the prior relationship between the stalking per-
petrator and victim (stranger, acquaintance, or ex-partner) influences people’s
perception of whether the perpetrator’s behavior constitutes stalking; neces-
sitates police intervention; causes the victim alarm or personal distress; causes
the victim to fear the use of violence; and can be attributed to encouragement
on the part of the victim. This study was particularly focused on whether
cross-national differences in perceptions exist between participants based in
Malaysia and England, and, if they do, potential explanations for this.
Additionally, this study explored the extent to which attribution of victim
responsibility mediates the effect of prior relationship and nationality on per-
ceptions of whether the perpetrator’s behavior constitutes stalking; necessi-
tates police intervention; causes the victim alarm or personal distress; and
causes the victim to fear the use of violence. Only one earlier work (Sheridan
et al., 2016a) examined whether victim responsibility was a significant medi-
ator of perceptions of stalking. This study was conducted using a police sam-
ple and found that target responsibility partly mediated officer perceptions.
The present study explored this mediation role within a general population
sample in order to examine whether this often-inferred relationship can be
observed at a statistically significant level.
The present study fills a gap by including empirical data from an Asian
country, contributing to the existing literature in a significant way. It was
conducted in Malaysia, a Southeast Asian country with a complex multiracial
Asian population. This study provides insights into how acceptable stalking
is considered in different regions, particularly given that Malaysia inherited
its common law from the United Kingdom.
Methods
Participants
A total of 574 participants submitted their responses, but only responses with
a completion rate of at least 80% were included in the analyses (464, or
80.84%). Malaysian participants were recruited from student and community
samples using opportunity sampling. The online study was advertised to stu-
dents on the University of Reading Malaysia campus using the University’s
research participation pool and on the social media networks of the research-
ers. The data included 294 Malaysians (104 males, 189 females, and one
preferred not to say) aged 18 to 71 (M = 28.73, SD = 11.71). Most were ethnic
Chinese (48.0%), followed by ethnic Malay (38.8%), ethnic Indian (5.8%),
8 Journal of Interpersonal Violence
and other ethnicities (6.1%), while 1.4% preferred not to say. More than half
(57.5%) of the sample were single at the time of the study, 12.2% were in a
relationship, 28.6% were married, 0.3% were divorced, 1.0% were widowed,
and 0.3% classified their marital status as others. Most participants (75.5%)
had no children. About half of the Malaysian participants (53.4%) had
attained at least a bachelor’s degree.
English participants consisted of primarily undergraduate psychology stu-
dents on the United Kingdom campus, which is situated in Southern England.
Students were recruited using the University of Reading Malaysia research par-
ticipation pool. There were 170 English participants (16 males and 154 females)
aged 18 to 66 (M = 21.58, SD = 7.85). The majority of the sample were White
(71.2%), 14.7% were Asian British, 2.9% were Black British, 8.8% were of
other ethnic backgrounds, while 2.4% preferred not to say. About half (51.8%)
were single at the time of the study, 41.2% were in a relationship, 6.5% were
married, and 0.6% were divorced. Almost all participants (94.7%) did not have
children. Less than one third (28.3%) of the English participants had completed
at least a bachelor’s degree, but the majority (70.6%) had further education
(e.g., A-levels) or diplomas as their highest qualification.
Measures and Procedure
Data was collected as part of a larger project examining dispositional and
contextual factors that may contribute to perceptions of stalking. This was an
anonymous study administered via an online platform, Qualtrics. The study
was advertised as a “Perceptions of Interpersonal Behavior” study. Informed
consent was obtained. Following the research paradigm by Scott et al. (2013),
participants’ perceptions of stalking were then examined using a written one-
paragraph vignette. There were three versions of the vignette, representing
the different degree of prior intimacy between the perpetrator and the victim:
stranger, acquaintance, and ex-partner. All three versions described the same
stalking scenario; the stranger vignette is presented as follows:
Liza first met Adam when she visited the estate agents where he works to
renew the lease on her apartment. As Liza was leaving the office Adam asked
if she would like to join him for lunch. Liza thanked him for the offer, but
declined. During the 3 months that followed, Adam sent Liza between 5 and
10 text messages a day, many of these messages asking why she was not
interested in him. Adam also approached Liza on her way to work and tele-
phoned her at home. Liza asked Adam to stop calling her, but he continued
to call her regularly. In the end Liza disconnected the phone and Adam left
several messages blaming her for what was happening. Most recently, Adam
Chung and Sheridan 9
arrived at Liza’s home soon after she returned from work. Liza pretended
that she was out.
In the acquaintance condition Liza and Adam had worked together for
three months when he invited her for lunch. In the ex-partner condition, Liza
and Adam had been in a romantic relationship, but she ended it when she
realized they wanted different things from the relationship. All participants
were randomly assigned into one of the three conditions.
Each vignette was followed by five 11-point Likert-type statements to
measure participants’ perceptions of stalking. The statements are as follows:
1. To what extent does Adam’s behavior constitute stalking? (“Definitely
not stalking” to “Definitely stalking”)
2. To what extent does Adam’s behavior necessitate police intervention?
(“Not at all necessary” to “Extremely necessary”)
3. Do you think Adam’s behavior will cause Liza alarm or personal dis-
tress? (“Definitely not” to “Definitely”)
4. Do you think Adam’s behavior will cause Liza to fear that he will use
violence against her? (“Definitely not” to “Definitely”)
5. To what extent is Liza responsible for encouraging Adam’s behavior?
(“Not at all responsible” to “Totally responsible”)
Participants then completed a demographic information questionnaire that
comprised questions about nationality, age, gender, ethnic background, mari-
tal status, number of children, and level of education. Participants were pro-
vided with a debrief sheet upon completion. This study received ethical
approval from the University of Reading Malaysia Research Ethics Committee.
Results
A 3(prior relationship: stranger, acquaintance, ex-partner) × 2(nationality:
Malaysian, English) MANOVA showed significant main effects of prior rela-
tionship, F(5, 458) = 4.35, p < .001, Wilks’ Λ = .91, partial η2 = .05 and
nationality F(5, 458) = 30.26, p < .001, Wilks’ Λ = .75, partial η2 = .25. Table
1 shows descriptive statistics for all five perception scale items, whereas
Table 2 shows F ratios for the perception items by prior relationship condi-
tions and nationality. There was a significant main effect of prior relationship
on all individual perception scale items. A Tukey post hoc test showed that
overall participants were more likely to believe that the harassing behavior
constituted stalking, that police intervention was necessary, that the behavior
would cause the victim alarm or distress and fear of violence, and that the
10 Journal of Interpersonal Violence
victim was less responsible for the behavior when the perpetrator was por-
trayed as a stranger or acquaintance rather than an ex-partner. There was also
a significant main effect of nationality on all individual perception scale
items except for fear of violence, p = .68. Compared to Malaysians, English
participants were more likely to consider the perpetrator’s behavior to consti-
tute stalking, necessitate police intervention, cause the victim alarm or per-
sonal distress, but less likely to think the victim was responsible for
encouraging the perpetrator’s behavior. There was no significant interaction
effect between prior relationship and nationality on the five perception scale
items, F(5, 458) = 1.58, p = .11, Wilks’ Λ = .97, partial η2 = .02.
Analyses using the PROCESS macro model 4 were conducted to deter-
mine whether attribution of victim responsibility mediated the effect of prior
relationship and nationality on perceptions of stalking. Figure 1 shows the
mediation model diagrams for each perception item. As predicted, there were
significant indirect effects of victim responsibility between prior relationship
conditions on whether the behavior was judged to: constitute stalking, indi-
rect = –.33, SE = .10, 95% CI [–.55, –.16], necessitate police intervention,
Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations for the Five Perception Scale Items by
Prior Relationship Conditions and Nationality.
Condition
M (SD)
Stalking Intervention Alarm Violence Responsibility
Overall
Stranger 8.43 (2.20) 7.41 (2.44) 8.96 (1.72) 7.86 (2.12) 1.96 (2.65)
Acquaintance 8.22 (2.12) 7.28 (2.39) 8.99 (1.57) 7.99 (2.10) 2.01 (2.70)
Ex-partner 7.23 (2.78) 5.97 (3.17) 8.42 (2.12) 7.25 (2.46) 3.47 (3.11)
Malaysian
Stranger 8.15 (2.41) 7.05 (2.74) 8.75 (1.94) 7.92 (2.27) 2.58 (2.79)
Acquaintance 7.71 (2.44) 6.98 (2.66) 8.80 (1.70) 8.09 (2.34) 2.86 (2.92)
Ex-partner 6.57 (3.10) 5.24 (3.40) 8.03 (2.43) 7.20 (2.73) 4.74 (3.07)
Total 7.47 (2.75) 6.41 (3.07) 8.52 (2.07) 7.73 (2.48) 3.40 (3.07)
English
Stranger 8.93 (1.67) 8.05 (1.57) 9.35 (1.17) 7.76 (1.83) 0.84 (1.94)
Acquaintance 9.05 (1.03) 7.78 (1.79) 9.29 (1.27) 7.84 (1.63) 0.64 (1.52)
Ex-partner 8.39 (1.56) 7.26 (2.22) 9.11 (1.16) 7.33 (1.89) 1.25 (1.52)
Total 8.79 (1.46) 7.69 (2.22) 9.25 (1.20) 7.65 (1.79) 0.91 (1.68)
Chung and Sheridan 11
Table 2. Multivariate and Univariate Analyses of Variance F Ratios for the Five
Perception Scale Items by Prior Relationship Conditions and Nationality.
MANOVA ANOVA
F F
Condition Stalking Inter-
vention
Alarm Violence Respon-
sibility
Relationship 4.35** 8.93** 10.50** 3.45* 4.01* 11.92**
Nationality 30.26** 34.94** 25.56** 17.55** 0.17 103.17**
Relationship
× Nationality
1.58 1.83 2.27 1.09 0.28 4.57*
Note. *p < .05; **p < .01.
indirect = –.25, SE = .10, 95% CI [–.46, –.09], and cause the victim alarm or
distress indirect = –.18, SE = .06, 95% CI [–.32, –.08]. The indirect effect of
victim responsibility between prior relationship conditions on the extent to
which the behavior was perceived to cause the victim to fear violence was
nonsignificant, indirect = –.06, SE = .06, 95% CI [–.18, .05]. There were also
significant indirect effects of victim responsibility on nationality concerning
whether the behavior was believed to: constitute stalking, indirect = .49, SE
= .13, 95% CI [.25, .74], necessitate police intervention, indirect = .37, SE =
.14, 95% CI [.09, .66], and cause the victim alarm or distress indirect = .25,
SE = .08, 95% CI [.09, .42]. The indirect effect of victim responsibility
between nationality on the extent to which the behavior was perceived to
cause the victim to fear violence was nonsignificant, indirect = –.21, SE =
.10, 95% CI [.01, .42].
Discussion
The present study sought to examine the role of prior relationship between
stalking perpetrator and victim in perceptions of a stalking scenario, within
Malaysian and English populations. First, findings indicate that prior rela-
tionship between the perpetrator and victim of stalking influenced how par-
ticipants responded on all five perception scale items. Participants of both
nationalities were more likely to think the behavior constituted stalking, war-
ranted police intervention, would result in the victim feeling alarm or dis-
tress, and to consider that the victim would fear the use of violence when the
perpetrator was portrayed as a stranger or acquaintance to the victim rather
than an ex-partner. Participants were also more likely to believe that the
12 Journal of Interpersonal Violence
Figure 1. Models representing the mediated effect of prior relationship and
nationality on the five perception scale items through victim responsibility.
Note. * p < .05; ** p < .01.
victim was responsible for the harassing behavior when the perpetrator and
the victim were depicted as prior ex-intimates. The data are in line with exist-
ing findings that have demonstrated a robust relational bias (Scott et al.,
2014; Scott & Sheridan, 2011).
Second, there were significant differences in perceptions between partici-
pants of both nationalities across conditions. Specifically, Malaysians were
less likely than English participants to perceive the perpetrator’s behavior as
stalking, requiring police intervention, and causing the victim alarm or per-
sonal distress. Malaysians were also more likely than English participants to
judge the victim as responsible for encouraging the perpetrator’s behavior.
From these findings, it can be concluded that although the typical rela-
tional biases still existed in both samples, Malaysian participants were less
likely than their English counterparts to label the harassing scenario as stalk-
ing. This indicates that Malaysians may underestimate the severity of stalk-
ing cases more so than English populations. Moreover, perceptions of victim
responsibility mediated the effect of prior relationship and nationality on
people’s perceptions of whether a harassing behavior by a perpetrator is con-
sidered stalking, requires police intervention, or causes distress in the victim.
This suggests that perpetrator-victim relationship status and perceiver
Chung and Sheridan 13
nationality cannot fully explain how people perceive harassment situations,
and that a variety of other factors—some remaining unexplored—have an
impact on blame attribution, which in turn predicts stalking perceptions. As
outlined previously, this attribution of blame toward victims or victim-blam-
ing phenomenon, whereby victims rather than the perpetrator are made to
feel responsible when an assault occurs, is a key theme within the rape and
domestic violence literature. It has previously been postulated as a factor that
influences the perceived seriousness of stalking incidents (Boehnlein et al.,
2020; Korkodeilou, 2014; Sheridan et al., 2016a).
According to Grubb and Turner (2012), victim-blaming tends to be per-
petuated by a variety of cognitive and motivational biases, which could be a
result of one’s personality disposition and social prescriptions. One theoretical
explanation of this counterintuitive response to crime victims is the just world
theory (Lerner, 1980), which refers to the tendency to believe that the world is
a fair place and that “people get what they deserve and deserve what they get.”
This perspective posits that negative victim perception occurs due to an over-
compensation when judging a seemingly undeserving act; holding victims
responsible for their misfortune helps observers regain their sense of control
and restore congruence with the view that the world is just and orderly. In the
case of stalking victimization, just world beliefs offer a justification as to why
victims are harassed (i.e., they did not do enough to protect themselves, they
precipitated or provoked their own victimization through their character or
behavior, wittingly or not). This perspective cannot be as easily adopted when
no previous history exists between perpetrator and target.
Hofstede’s (1980) cultural dimensions could be used to explain the differ-
ences observed in attitudes and perceptions held toward victims of stalking
across the different countries. Malaysia is one of the Southeast Asian coun-
tries that has a complex multiracial Asian population, consisting of three
main ethnic groups, namely Malay, Chinese, and Indian, as well as other
indigenous groups. Cognitive schemas may very well be influenced by such
factors. As per Hofstede’s theory (Hofstede, 2011), Malaysia is considered a
collectivistic society with high power distance. People in such societies are
more likely to accept and operate under a hierarchical structure, but they also
tend to avoid situations that may endanger social harmony, through suppres-
sion of their own thoughts and feelings. Challenging governing authorities
also tends not to be well-received in high power distance societies; this has
profound consequences as the public will be less likely to lodge complaints
against police inaction or misconduct. Experimental and survey studies have
indicated that individuals with high power distance orientation, particularly
those of Asian descent, tended to report lower rates of sexual harassment than
people in low power distance cultures, suggesting that those who are likely to
14 Journal of Interpersonal Violence
accept power differentials may be more tolerant of behaviors that count as
harassment and perceive such behaviors as less severe (Kennedy & Gorzalka,
2002; Mishra & Stair, 2019).
Furthermore, akin to most violent crimes, stalking tends to be framed as a
gendered crime. One point that is relevant in the context of Malaysia where
violence against women is arguably prevalent in parts of the country is the
traditional attitudes toward gender norms (Alam & Ilias, 2014; Endut et al.,
2020). A strong adherence to traditional masculine norms and belief in gen-
dered power dynamics are associated with higher likelihood of perpetration
of violence against women (Willie et al., 2018). Further, it has been argued
that individuals living in societies where men hold authority over women
tend to adhere to ‘rape myths’ that encompass problematic stereotypical
assumptions about the likely behavior of perpetrators and victims (Ward,
1995). However, as cultural dimensions were not actually measured in the
current study, it is premature to assume that all individuals within Malaysia
share the same values. Taken together, it is evident that individual attitudes
toward harassment behaviors differ based on the perceiver’s country of ori-
gin, but it is arguable that the oversimplistic individualist-collectivist dichot-
omy that is often put forward as a cultural explanation of cross-national
differences is inadequate.
Another theory that is central to the literature on victim-blaming is the
attribution theory (Heider, 1958), which relates to the way in which people
use available information to arrive at causal explanations for events that have
occurred. Individual differences in attributional style can influence how peo-
ple respond to harassment behaviors. Observers of stalking cases with the
propensity to utilize an internal attribution are more likely to infer that the
harassment incidents are due to personal factors such as traits, abilities, or
physical characteristics of the victims. This requires corroboration; future
work should expand the literature by examining the role of individual differ-
ences variables such as personality factors in predicting attitudes toward
stalking victimization.
Limitations
As mentioned, stalking is a crime that shows a gendered victimization pattern
and as such, the vignettes included in this study involved a male perpetrator
and a female target. Existing findings have found that perceptions of serious-
ness are greater when the behavior is perpetrated by a man rather than by a
woman (Scott et al., 2019), although there is work that suggests that the
actual harm of stalking on the victim is equally severe and therefore should
be taken just as seriously (Strand & McEwan, 2012). The generalizability of
Chung and Sheridan 15
this study’s findings is therefore limited. Given that sociocultural context
influences gender role expectations, and that such expectations may result in
differential treatment by the criminal justice system, future research in the
Southeast Asia region should consider the role of both perpetrator and victim
gender in stalking perception research.
There was also a significant difference in sample characteristics. For one,
the English participants were significantly younger in age compared to the
Malaysians and comprised mainly university students, whereas the Malaysian
sample reflected a more diverse demographic. It is, however, possible that the
young age of English participants meant they have grown up in a cultural
context that is more attentive to issues of gender equality and violence against
women in general, hence the stronger inclination to label harassment behav-
iors as stalking incidents causing distress and needing intervention from law
enforcement agencies. Further, in both samples there was a large gender
imbalance, with significantly more females compared to males, which would
presumably have implications for the interpretation of findings.
Arguably, the five perceptual items in the current study do not adequately
capture the complexity of how people perceive interpersonal violence. More
in-depth analyses of the perception constructs via qualitative designs would
have been able to address this limitation. More recently, perception research-
ers have also proposed using more sophisticated designs such as videotaped
vignettes to provide perceivers with more realistic and contextual informa-
tion (van der Bruggen & Grubb, 2014). Adoption of these recommendations
will allow for better construct and ecological validity.
Conclusions and Future Directions
The current study offers an insight into perceptions of stalking among people
from different legislations and cultural backgrounds. This is one of the few
stalking perception studies that was not wholly based on samples drawn from
WEIRD societies that have enacted anti-stalking laws.
The present findings highlight the need to improve criminal justice
responses to victims of harassment and stalking. A recent review of the crimi-
nal justice system in the United States by Backes et al. (2020) has shown that
police are generally unfamiliar with what behaviors constitute stalking and
typically regarded intimate partner stalking as situations where victims could
potentially “work it out” with the stalker. This is likely to be the case in
Malaysia since there is currently no clear legislative framework to criminal-
ize stalking. Charity organizations in Malaysia are lobbying for the introduc-
tion of anti-stalking laws. Given the significant negative effects in the lives of
victims, it is hoped that stalking will soon be recognized as a crime, after
16 Journal of Interpersonal Violence
which future work should focus on using a longitudinal study design to
examine how far people’s stalking perceptions are shaped by policy and
awareness. Perceptions of police officers would be particularly important, as
they are the frontline workers who make arrest decisions pertaining to such
incidents. To believe that ex-partner stalkers present a lower risk of violence
and therefore require less police intervention is a misperception; a dismissive
response or a disinclination to acknowledge the severity of stalking behavior
may result in improper treatment of victims (van der Aa & Groenen, 2011). It
should, however, be noted that the enactment of legislation does not equate to
better police practice or knowledge of the issue of stalking (Taylor-Dunn et
al., 2018). Clear policies and adequate training led by specialists in the field
would ensure that the social problem of stalking victimization is taken
seriously.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Ling Yut Hooi and Eugenie Yong Shin Chiang who assisted in data
collection.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publi-
cation of this article.
ORCID iDs
Kai Li Chung https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0012-8752
Lorraine Sheridan https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8705-0531
References
Alam, M. S., & Ilias, N. (2014). Measuring married men attitudes towards equitable
gender norms. Advances in Environmental Biology, 8(17), 36-41.
Archer, J. (2006). Cross-cultural differences in physical aggression between partners:
A social-role analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(2), 133-
153. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1002_3
Backes, B. L., Fedina, L., & Holmes, J. L. (2020). The criminal justice system
response to intimate partner stalking: A systematic review of quantitative and
Chung and Sheridan 17
qualitative research. Journal of Family Violence, 35(7), 665-678. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10896-020-00139-3
Bailey, B., & Morris, M. C. (2018). Longitudinal associations among negative cog-
nitions and depressive and posttraumatic stress symptoms in women recently
exposed to stalking. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(11-12), 5775-5794.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518807905
Boehnlein, T., Kretschmar, J., Regoeczi, W., & Smialek, J. (2020). Responding to
stalking victims: Perceptions, barriers, and directions for future research. Journal
of Family Violence, 35(7), 755-768. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-020-00147-3
Cass, A. I., & Mallicoat, S. L. (2015). College student perceptions of victim action:
Will targets of stalking report to police? American Journal of Criminal Justice,
40(2), 250-269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-014-9252-8
Cass, A. I., & Rosay, A. B. (2012). College student perceptions of criminal justice sys-
tem responses to stalking. Sex Roles, 66(5-6), 392-404. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11199-011-9934-3
Chan, H. C., & Sheridan, L. (2020). Is this stalking? Perceptions of stalking
behavior among young male and female adults in Hong Kong and Mainland
China. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 35(19-20), 3710-3734. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0886260517711180
Chapman, D. E., & Spitzberg, B. H. (2003). Are you following me? A study of
unwanted relationship pursuit and stalking in Japan: What behaviors are preva-
lent? Hijiyama University Bulletin, 10, 89-117.
Domestic Violence (Amendment) Act 2017 (Malaysia).
Dye, M. L., & Davis, K. E. (2003). Stalking and psychological abuse: Common fac-
tors and relationship-specific characteristics. Violence and Victims, 18(2), 163-
180. https://doi.org/10.1891/vivi.2003.18.2.163
Endut, N., Bagheri, R., Azman, A., Hashim, I. H. M., Selamat, N. H., & Mohajer, L.
(2020). The effect of gender role on attitudes towards inequitable gender norms
among Malaysian men. Sexuality and Culture, 24(6), 2113-2136. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s12119-020-09740-6
Grubb, A., & Turner, E. (2012). Attribution of blame in rape cases: A review of the
impact of rape myth acceptance, gender role conformity and substance use on
victim blaming. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17(5), 443-452. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.avb.2012.06.002
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. Wiley.
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the
world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2-3), 61-83. https://doi.org/10.1017/
S0140525X0999152X
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-
related values. SAGE.
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in con-
text. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 1-26. https://doi.
org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014
18 Journal of Interpersonal Violence
Kennedy, M. A., & Gorzalka, B. B. (2002). Asian and non-Asian attitudes toward
rape, sexual harassment, and sexuality. Sex Roles, 46(7-8), 227-238. https://doi.
org/10.1023/A:1020145815129
Korkodeilou, J. (2014). Dealing with the unknown: Learning from stalking victims’
experiences. Crime Prevention and Community Safety, 16(4), 253-268. https://
doi.org/10.1057/cpcs.2014.10
Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. Plenum Press.
McEwan, T. E., Mullen, P. E., & MacKenzie, R. (2009). A study of the predictors
of persistence in stalking situations. Law and Human Behavior, 33(2), 149-158.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-008-9141-0
McFarlane, J. M., Campbell, J. C., Wilt, S., Sachs, C. J., Ulrich, Y., & Xu, X. (1999).
Stalking and intimate partner femicide. Homicide Studies, 3(4), 300-316. https://
doi.org/10.1177/1088767999003004003
Ménard, K. S., & Pincus, A. L. (2012). Predicting overt and cyber stalking perpe-
tration by male and female college students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,
27(11), 2183-2207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260511432144
Mishra, V., & Stair, E. (2019). Does power distance influence perceptions of sex-
ual harassment at work? An experimental investigation. Psychological Studies,
64(2), 235-246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-019-00495-1
Morewitz, S. (2003). Stalking and violence: New patterns of obsession and trauma.
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Nijdam-Jones, A., Rosenfeld, B., Gerbrandij, J., Quick, E., & Galietta, M. (2018).
Psychopathology of stalking offenders: Examining the clinical, demographic,
and stalking characteristics of a community-based sample. Criminal Justice and
Behavior, 45(5), 712-731. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854818760643
Peterson, C., Kearns, M. C., McIntosh, W. L. K. W., Estefan, L. F., Nicolaidis, C.,
McCollister, K. E., Gordon, A., & Florence, C. (2018). Lifetime economic burden
of intimate partner violence among U.S. adults. American Journal of Preventive
Medicine, 55(4), 433-444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2018.04.049
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (England and Wales).
Rosenfeld, B. (2004). Violence risk factors in stalking and obsessional harassment:
A review and preliminary meta-analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 31(1),
9-36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854803259241
Scott, A. J. (2020). Stalking: How perceptions differ from reality and why these dif-
ferences matter. In R. Bull & I. Blandón-Gitlin (Eds.), The Routledge interna-
tional handbook of legal and investigative psychology (pp. 238-254). Routledge.
Scott, A. J., Duff, S. C., Sheridan, L., & Rajakaruna, N. (2019). The influence of
contextual information regarding the breakdown of relationships and perpetrator-
target sex composition on perceptions of relational stalking. Psychology, Crime
and Law, 25(4), 364-380. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2018.1529231
Scott, A. J., Nixon, K., & Sheridan, L. (2013). The influence of prior relationship on
perceptions of stalking: A comparison of laypersons, nonspecialist police offi-
cers, and specialist police officers. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 40(12), 1434-
1448. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854813494183
Chung and Sheridan 19
Scott, A. J., Rajakaruna, N., Sheridan, L., & Sleath, E. (2014). International per-
ceptions of stalking and responsibility: The influence of prior relationship and
severity of behavior. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 41(2), 220-236. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0093854813500956
Scott, A. J., & Sheridan, L. (2011). “Reasonable” perceptions of stalking: The influ-
ence of conduct severity and the perpetrator target relationship. Psychology,
Crime and Law, 17(4), 331-343. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160903203961
Sheridan, L., Arianayagam, J., & Chan, H. C. (2019). Perceptions and experiences
of intrusive behavior and stalking within a culture. Psychology, Crime and Law,
25(4), 381-395. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2018.1529233
Sheridan, L., & Roberts, K. (2011). Key questions to consider in stalking cases.
Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 29(2), 255-270. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.966
Sheridan, L., Scott, A. J., & Nixon, K. (2016a). Police officer perceptions of harass-
ment in England and Scotland. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 21(1), 1-
14. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12049
Sheridan, L., Scott, A. J., & Roberts, K. (2016b). Young women’s experiences of
intrusive behavior in 12 countries. Aggressive Behavior, 42(1), 41-53. https://doi.
org/10.1002/ab.21604
Sinclair, H. C., & Frieze, I. H. (2000). Initial courtship behavior and stalking:
How should we draw the line? Violence and Victims, 15(1), 23-40. https://doi.
org/10.1891/0886-6708.15.1.23
Spitzberg, B. H. (2002). The tactical topography of stalking victimization
and management. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 3(4), 261-288. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1524838002237330
Spitzberg, B. H., & Cupach, W. R. (2007). The state of the art of stalking: Taking
stock of the emerging literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12(1), 64-86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2006.05.001
Spitzberg, B. H., & Cupach, W. R. (2014). The dark side of relationship pursuit:
From attraction to obsession and stalking (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Strand, S., & McEwan, T. E. (2012). Violence among female stalkers. Psychological
Medicine, 42(3), 545-555. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291711001498
Taylor-Dunn, H., Bowen, E., & Gilchrist, E. A. (2018). Reporting harass-
ment and stalking to the police: A qualitative study of victims’ experi-
ences. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(11-12), 5965-5992. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0886260518811423
The Crown Prince Prosecution Service. (2020, December). Stalking analysis reveals
domestic abuse link. https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/stalking-analysis-reveals-
domestic-abuse-link
van der Aa, S., & Groenen, A. (2011). Identifying the needs of stalking victims and
the responsiveness of the criminal justice system: A qualitative study in Belgium
and the Netherlands. Victims and Offenders, 6(1), 19-37. https://doi.org/10.1080
/15564886.2011.534006
van der Bruggen, M., & Grubb, A. (2014). A review of the literature relating to rape
victim blaming: An analysis of the impact of observer and victim characteristics
20 Journal of Interpersonal Violence
on attribution of blame in rape cases. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 19(5),
523-531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2014.07.008
Ward, C. A. (1995). Attitudes toward rape: Feminist and social psychological per-
spectives. SAGE.
Weller, M., Hope, L., & Sheridan, L. (2013). Police and public perceptions of stalk-
ing: The role of prior victim-offender relationship. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 28(2), 320-339. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260512454718
Willie, T. C., Khondkaryan, E., Callands, T., & Kershaw, T. (2018). “Think like a
man”: How sexual cultural scripting and masculinity influence changes in men’s
use of intimate partner violence. American Journal of Community Psychology,
61(1-2), 240-250. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajcp.12224
Women’s Aid Organisation. (2013). Monitoring the implementation of the domestic
violence act (1994).
Author Biographies
Kai Li Chung, PhD, is a lecturer in the School of Psychology and Clinical Language
Sciences at University of Reading Malaysia. Her research interests fall under person-
ality and forensic psychology. Her current work focuses on the role of aversive per-
sonality traits in interpersonal violence.
Lorraine Sheridan, PhD, is an associate professor in the School of Population Health
at Curtin University and a forensic psychologist. She is recognized as a global expert
on stalking. Her research interests are in cross-cultural investigations, the association
between stalking and sex offending, young stalkers, and the effects of psychological
versus physical damage on stalking victims.
