CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 40Stalking, Cyberstalking, and HarassmentBullying, Victimization, and AggressionWorkplace Violence and Bullying

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Measuring stalking: the development and evaluation of the Stalking Assessment Indices (SAI)

Open access
McEwan, Troy E., Simmons, Melanie, Clothier, Taryn, Senkans, Svenja·2021·Psychiatry, Psychology and Law
DOI 10.1080/13218719.2020.1787904PMC PMC9067960
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Troy E. McEwana* , Melanie Simmonsa , Taryn Clothiera & Svenja Senkansab a Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology and Forensicare, Alphington, VIC, Australiab AMEOS Klinikum für Forensische Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Neustadt i. H., GermanyCorrespondence: Troy E. McEwan tmcewan@swin.edu.au Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology and Forensicare, Level 1, 582 Heidelberg Rd, Alphington, VIC, 3078, AustraliaSupplemental data for this article are available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2020.1787904.Accurate measurement of stalking has proven difficult, partly because stalking is characterised by the cumulative effects of a pattern of behaviour. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a new measure of stalking that overcomes the observed shortcomings of existing tools. The Stalking Assessment Indices (SAI) were created using index development principles and evaluated in 244 Australian undergraduate students (Mage= 33.7, 77% female). Seventy-three reported stalking victimisation (experiencing at least five intrusions over at least two weeks causing substantial fear or distress), and 51 reported stalking perpetration. Stalking behaviours reported by victims formed a two-component structure, which was also observed in multidimensional scaling analysis. The perpetration index showed good convergent validity with measures of rumination and aggression, and both indices had adequate test–retest reliability over four weeks. These results suggest that the SAI could provide a consistent and inclusive measure of stalking for use across different research settings.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13218719.2020.1787904

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The discrepant findings demonstrate the importance of definitional consistency in stalking research and indicate heterogeneity in risk factors across groups of stalkers.

    “The discrepant findings demonstrate the importance of definitional consistency in stalking research and indicate heterogeneity in risk factors across groups of stalkers (Fox et al., 2011; McEwan et al., 2021).”

    From Police-Identified Psychological Distress, Substance Use, and Physical Violence Among Male Intimate Partner Stalkers (2025) · cites this paper as McEwan et al., 2021

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 91

  1. 10.1002/sim.2256 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/j.apnu.2005.10.003 · DOI
  3. Backes B.L., 2020, Journal of Family Violence
  4. 10.1177/0093854812460489 · DOI
  5. 10.4324/9781315618777-16 · DOI
  6. 10.1891/0886-6708.15.4.389 · DOI
  7. 10.1037/0033-2909.110.2.305 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2017.07.003 · DOI
  9. Brownhalls J., 2019, Journal of Interpersonal Violence
  10. 10.1006/jrpe.2000.2302 · DOI
  11. Bryant F.B., 1995, Reading and understanding multivariate statistics, 99
  12. 10.1207/s15327906mbr2704_2 · DOI
  13. 10.1080/09585189008408469 · DOI
  14. Chan H.C., 2017, Journal of Interpersonal Violence
  15. Chan H.C., 2020, Legal and Criminological Psychology
  16. 10.3390/ijerph17072298 · DOI
  17. 10.1177/088626097012003007 · DOI
  18. Cupach W.R., 2004, The dark side of relationship pursuit
  19. 10.1080/08934215.2011.613737 · DOI
  20. 10.1007/s11199-010-9882-3 · DOI
  21. 10.1007/s10896-015-9687-9 · DOI
  22. 10.1023/A:1020256022568 · DOI
  23. 10.1037/1076-8971.11.3.384 · DOI
  24. DeVellis R.F., 2016, Scale development: Theory and applications
  25. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.009 · DOI
  26. 10.1509/jmkr.38.2.269.18845 · DOI
  27. 10.1016/S1359-1789(00)00018-5 · DOI
  28. 10.1177/1077801214552911 · DOI
  29. 10.1111/j.1745-9133.2002.tb00091.x · DOI
  30. 10.1016/j.avb.2010.12.004 · DOI
  31. 10.1520/JFS14178J · DOI
  32. 10.1177/0093854803259244 · DOI
  33. 10.1080/1068316X.2016.1197225 · DOI
  34. 10.4135/9781412985130 · DOI
  35. Langhinrichsen-Rohling J., 2002, Stalking: Perspectives on victims and perpetrators, 212
  36. Langhinrichsen-Rohling J., 2000, Violence and Victims, 15, 73, 10.1891/0886-6708.15.1.73 · DOI
  37. 10.1891/0886-6708.15.1.91 · DOI
  38. 10.1177/1524838009334461 · DOI
  39. 10.1891/0886-6708.25.4.440 · DOI
  40. Lowney K.S., 1995, Images of issues: Typifying contemporary social problems, 33
  41. McAnaney K.G., 1993, Notre Dame Law Review, 68, 819
  42. 10.1080/14789949.2016.1247188 · DOI
  43. McEwan T.E., 2020, Psycho-criminological approaches to stalking behaviour: An international perspectives, 115
  44. 10.1080/14999013.2019.1661885 · DOI
  45. 10.1375/pplt.14.2.207 · DOI
  46. 10.1017/S0033291708004996 · DOI
  47. 10.1891/1946-6560.8.3.223 · DOI
  48. 10.1002/bsl.477 · DOI
  49. 10.1007/978-981-15-0653-6_5 · DOI
  50. 10.1080/07448481.2011.584335 · DOI
  51. Mechanic M.B., 2000, Violence and Victims, 15, 55, 10.1891/0886-6708.15.1.55 · DOI · Paper page
  52. 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2005.00030.x · DOI
  53. 10.1017/CBO9780511544088 · DOI
  54. Mullen P.E., 1999, The American Journal of Psychiatry, 156, 1244, 10.1176/ajp.156.8.1244 · DOI
  55. Ndubueze P.N., 2017, Dutse Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2, 1
  56. Nijdam-Jones A., 2018, Criminal Justice and Behavior, 45, 009385481876064, 10.1177/0093854818760643 · DOI
  57. 10.1007/s00127-018-1557-3 · DOI
  58. 10.1080/07418820802427833 · DOI
  59. 10.1192/bjp.170.1.12 · DOI
  60. 10.1080/14789940412331313368 · DOI
  61. 10.1046/j.1440-1614.2002.00985.x · DOI
  62. 10.1192/bjp.187.5.416 · DOI
  63. 10.1016/S1359-1789(02)00075-7 · DOI
  64. 10.1177/009385402237998 · DOI
  65. Sato Mumm S., 2010, Violence and Victims, 25, 707, 10.1891/0886-6708.25.6.707 · DOI
  66. 10.1177/0093854813500956 · DOI
  67. 10.1080/10683160903203961 · DOI
  68. Senkans S., 2017, Journal of Interpersonal Violence
  69. 10.1016/j.paid.2015.10.032 · DOI
  70. 10.1177/088626001016002004 · DOI
  71. Sheridan L., 2000, Psychology, Crime & Law, 6, 267, 10.1080/10683160008409807 · DOI
  72. 10.1080/10683160208401821 · DOI
  73. 10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-13-00072 · DOI
  74. 10.1037/tam0000124 · DOI
  75. 10.1002/bsl.966 · DOI · Paper page
  76. Shye S., 1994, Applied social research methods series, Vol. 35. Introduction to facet theory: Content design and intrinsic data analysis in behavioral research
  77. 10.1177/0192513X19842587 · DOI
  78. 10.1891/0886-6708.15.1.23 · DOI
  79. Spitzberg, B.H. & Cupach, W.R. (2000). Towards a theory of obsessive relational intrusion and stalking. In K. Dindia and S. Duck (Eds.),Communication and Personal Relationships(pp. 131–146). John Wiley & Sons.
  80. 10.4324/9780203805916 · DOI
  81. 10.1891/1946-6560.1.3.259 · DOI
  82. 10.1016/j.scoms.2014.03.007 · DOI
  83. 10.1080/15332586.2012.725016 · DOI · Paper page
  84. Thompson C.M., 2008, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 15, 482, 10.1080/13218710802389432 · DOI
  85. Thompson C.M., 2014, Cognition and crime. Offender decision making and script analysis
  86. Tjaden, P. & Thoennes, N. (1998).Stalking in America: Findings from the national violence against women survey. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/169592.pdf · DOI
  87. Tjaden P., 2000, Violence and Victims, 15, 427, 10.1891/0886-6708.15.4.427 · DOI
  88. 10.1348/147608305X53161 · DOI
  89. Van der Aa S., 2018, European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 24, 315, 10.1007/s10610-017-9359-9 · DOI
  90. 10.1002/ab.21507 · DOI
  91. White J., 2000, Violence and Victims, 15, 373, 10.1891/0886-6708.15.4.373 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
McEwan, T. E., Simmons, M., Clothier, T., & Senkans, S.
Affiliations
Swinburne University of Technology (AU)
Corresponding author
McEwan, Troy E.
ORCID
Venue
Psychiatry, Psychology and Law
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2020-07-28
Volume
28
Issue
3
Pages
435-461
ISSN
  • 1321-8719 (ISSN-L)
  • 1934-1687
DOI
10.1080/13218719.2020.1787904
PMC
PMC9067960
OpenAlex
W3045829151
Cited by
40
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 1
FWCI
6.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychiatry Psychology and Law (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Workplace Violence and Bullying
Keywords
stalking, index development, convergent validity, test-retest reliability, rumination, aggression

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review