Urbani izziv, volume 32, no. 2, 2021
87
UDC: 712.25:343.9:159.938.363.2:364.624.6
DOI: 10.5379/urbani-izziv-en-2021-32-02-02
Received: 9 May 2021
Accepted: 2 November 2021
Nilgün Çolpan ERKAN
Beril SEVIN TOPÇU
Gender-based differences in fear of crime  
in public spaces: An investigation of a safe district  
in Istanbul
Safety is an important issue in large cities. Fear of crime, 
on the other hand, is an issue independent of actual crime 
rates, but it is directly related to spatial qualities, affecting 
people’s feelings of safety. Fear of crime also varies by gen-
der. This study investigates fear of crime in public places 
in a particularly safe location of a large metropolis. In this 
context, it focuses on the effects of spatial characteristics 
on fear of crime and the differences between genders. 
The study was carried out in one of the safest districts of 
Istanbul, which women consider safe. In a 2017 survey, 
387 male and female participants of varying ages were 
questioned regarding their fear, when they experienced 
such fear, and their reasons for fear in public space. Ac-
cording to the results, women felt a certain amount of 
fear of crime even in a safe district of the city. In addition, 
gender-based differences concerning fear in public places 
and the conditions in which fear is felt are significant.
Keywords: fear of crime, risk assessment, public space, 
gender, Istanbul
Urbani izziv, volume 32, no. 2, 2021
88
1 Introduction
This study examines gender differences in public spaces as a 
factor in fear of crime. One important reason why women 
avoid public spaces is fear of crime. This affects the gender 
balance in public spaces. It is therefore important for women 
to feel safe in public spaces to preserve their presence in these 
areas. In this context, the study’s main goal is to determine 
gender-based differences in the perception of safety and the 
source of fear of crime. The findings of this research may in-
form new regulations or amendments to current legislation.
One of the main motives for this study is the alarming increase 
in violence against women in Turkey in the last decade. Femi-
cide rates, which are one of the most striking consequences 
of this violence, increased by 30.6% between 2016 and 2018 
(428.9% in 15 years; Tığlı, 2019). Official records and data on 
crimes against women are not shared with the public in Turkey, 
and therefore it was not possible to include data relating to 
crimes other than murder in this study. Moreover, according 
to Lordoğlu (2018), reporting sexual assault and sexual har-
assment to the police is rather low in Turkey, and the defi-
nition and boundaries of sexual harassment are very blurred 
in Turkish society, and so this must be taken into account 
when assessing crimes against women. The report on violence 
against women in Turkey (Karal & Aydemir, 2012) emphasizes 
that, rather than the crime rates of a particular place, the rate 
of violence against women throughout the country may be a 
more significant factor influencing women’s fear of crime. Male 
violence is an extension of the patriarchal belief that a woman’s 
place is in the home; this manner of thinking implies that 
violence is overlooked and legitimized, especially when state 
intervention is insufficient. This results in women feeling de-
fenceless and vulnerable. Even though women may not actually 
be victimized, it prevents them from utilizing the city’s public 
spaces freely. News about women in Istanbul being attacked 
in public by men because of their clothing, and assailants not 
receiving the expected criminal penalties, are causing women 
to experience increasing fear in public spaces. Therefore, this 
study investigates gender-based differences in fear of crime in 
public spaces. In particular, it examines aspects related to fear 
of crime in public space and it seeks to determine how prob-
lems can be solved by urban design.
1.1 Literature review
Fear of crime stems from the belief of being victimized by 
crime. It is an emotional reaction caused by fear, danger, and 
anxiety toward potential violent crimes (Covington & Taylor, 
1991). When it occurs, it is combined with a feeling of vulnera-
bility due to the threat of physical harm (Garofalo, 1981; Ward 
et al., 1990). This is also described as a sense of insecurity. It 
can also be defined as an emotional reaction characterized by a 
sense of danger or anxiety created by crime or symbols related 
to crime (Ferraro & LaGrange, 1987). Individuals that fear 
crime avoid certain routes (Ravenscroft et al., 2002), walk less 
(Ross, 1993; Foster et al., 2010), interact less socially (Ross & 
Jang, 2000), and change their habits (Garofalo, 1981). When 
an individual’s perception of victimization is higher than the 
objective probability, fear of crime can turn into a serious prob-
lem. Fear of crime is both a personal and social problem that 
reduces the quality of life because it restricts access to social 
and cultural activities. It has a detrimental effect on individuals’ 
interaction in society (Sacco, 1993). The complex structure 
of fear of crime means that it is becoming a social and politi-
cal problem more comprehensive than crime itself (Garofalo, 
1981; Ferraro & LaGrange, 1992).
Fear of crime is an increasing fear type, especially for the res-
idents of larger cities, and it is significantly related to how 
individuals perceive their surroundings, and how they evalu-
ate themselves in their surroundings (Ferraro, 1995; Çardak, 
2012). Consequently, fear of crime is a factual and perceptual 
problem. Crime or fear of crime is directly related to education 
level, income level, age, ethnicity, place of residence, sense of 
belonging to a space, and gender (Gray et al., 2011). A main 
approach to fear of crime based on an individual’s characteris-
tics is the vulnerability perspective approach. According to this 
approach, groups that are deemed weaker, more defenceless, 
more unprotected, and more vulnerable to external factors in 
terms of physical, socioeconomic, and cultural status are as-
sumed to feel fear of crime more often than other groups in 
society (Ferraro, 1995; Çardak, 2012; Kul, 2013). Women, 
the elderly, the handicapped, and individuals without social 
support interpret the information they receive from their 
surroundings as a more intense fear of crime (Covington & 
Taylor, 1991; Çardak, 2012).
More vulnerable or disadvantaged groups of society with re-
gard to security (i.e., women, migrants, the poor, LGBT in-
dividuals, handicapped people, the elderly, children, and the 
homeless) are mostly examined in studies on fear of crime 
(Covington & Taylor, 1991; Pain, 2001; Otis, 2007; Jackson, 
2009). Although some studies have not shown significant 
differences based on age, they almost always conclude that 
fear of crime is higher in women than men (Valentine, 1989; 
MacMillan et al., 2000; Pain, 2001; Jackson, 2009; Uludağ, 
2010; Kul, 2013; Öztürk et al., 2016). Jackson’s (2009) study 
showed a gender difference disfavouring women in crimes 
against persons, whereas a gender difference was not detected 
in crimes against property.
N. Ç. ERKAN, B. SEVIN TOPÇU
Urbani izziv, volume 32, no. 2, 2021
89Gender-based differences in fear of crime in public spaces: An investigation of a safe district in Istanbul
Even though crime and fear of crime are related to each other 
as concepts, the relationship between them is weak ( Jackson, 
2009; Dolu et al., 2010). It is also important not to ignore 
the influence of mass media and the environment in fear of 
crime. The traditional view of society about women should 
also be considered in women’s fear of crime, which is detailed 
below. Finally, even though fear of crime is related to crime 
itself, it emerges as an independent factor after a certain point. 
This explains why fear of crime is seen not only in residents 
of districts with high crime rates, but also in residents of safer 
cities or districts where crime rates are lower (Furstenberg, 
1971; Ferraro, 1995).
1.1.1 Fear of crime and gender
Women are undoubtedly the most vulnerable part of society 
when it comes to fear of crime. The fear geography of women 
in the Western world has been studied since the late twentieth 
century (Valentine, 1989; Treske, 1990; Pain, 1991; Koskela, 
1997). On the other hand, in Turkey fear studies focusing on 
women have been gaining prominence only in the last decade 
(Dolu, 2010; Çardak, 2012; Erkan, 2015; Yirmibeşoğlu & Er-
gun, 2015). The vulnerability perspective is an approach that 
explains the gender difference in fear of crime. According to 
the vulnerability perspective, personal vulnerability perception 
is an important factor affecting fear of crime in individuals 
(Taylor & Hale, 1986; Franklin et al., 2008). Individuals that 
feel physically, socially, and economically defenceless experi-
ence a heightened sense of fear of crime (Covington & Tay-
lor, 1991; Hale, 1993) because they perceive themselves to be 
too weak and vulnerable to stand up against potential crimi-
nals and they see themselves as the potential victims of many 
crimes. This implies that women and the elderly are physically 
more vulnerable compared to men and youth. Hence, women 
(Warr, 1984; Hale, 1993; Mirrlees-Black et al., 1996; Sandberg 
& Rönnblom, 2013) and the elderly (Warr, 1984; Ferraro & 
LaGrange, 1992; Jackson, 2009) report a higher level of fear of 
crime. When recorded victimizations are compared, women, 
especially older women, experience fear of crime more even 
though they are rarely the victims; however, young men ex-
perience fear of crime less, even though their actual victim-
ization potential is higher (Hale, 1993). This inconsistency 
between fear levels and actual victimization rates is called the 
gender-fear paradox.
Studies of gender-based differences, including this study, show 
that women living in urban areas experience fear of crime more 
often and more intensely compared to men living in the same 
areas (Valentine, 1989, 1992; Hale, 1993; Koskela, 1999; Pain, 
1991, 2001; Dolu et al., 2010; Sandberg & Rönnblom, 2013; 
Uçan et al., 2016). Data on fear of crime show that there are 
relatively small but statistically meaningful differences between 
fear rates expressed by men and women (Gilchrist et al., 1998). 
As a result, gender surfaces as an important indicator of fear 
of crime.
Fear of crime affects women in two ways. Women may either 
stay away from certain places and activities to avoid the sense 
of fear, or they may internalize the prejudices and ideologies 
that harm women in general (Koskela, 1997; Sutton et al., 
2011). Either way, fear of crime is a mechanism that forces 
women out of particular urban spaces and social relationships. 
Consequently, women usually adopt avoidance behaviour be-
cause of fear of crime, and they place restrictions on their own 
lives. These restrictions may have to do with when they leave 
and return to their homes, where they go, how they dress, 
who they communicate with, and how they communicate. If 
the fear is too high, their lives are completely restricted by 
these influences (Valentine, 1989; Pain, 1991; Koskela, 1999; 
Çardak, 2012; Sandberg & Rönnblom, 2013; Tandoğan & 
Şimşek İlhan, 2016). Fear of crime especially restricts wom-
en’s access to public spaces and influences their behaviour in 
public. Because women avoid public spaces, the gender balance 
in public spaces deteriorates, further increasing women’s fear 
of using these spaces.
1.1.2 External factors in fear of crime
It would be wrong to think that fear of crime stems only from 
an individual’s personal perception. Therefore, many studies 
focus on external factors such as physical space itself, or mass 
media creating the perception of fear. A person’s fear of crime 
is not parallel to crime levels but is instead related to the news 
about crime in the mass media (Kohm et.al., 2002; Smolej 
& Janne, 2006; Çardak, 2012; Sandberg & Rönnblom, 2013; 
Callanan & Rosenberger, 2015; Sallan Gül & Altındal, 2015). 
Fear stimulates people to take precautions. In this case, even 
if there is not an actual danger, news about assault, rape, and 
violence against women in the mass media influences how 
women conduct themselves in public spaces. A study in Turkey 
about women’s fear of crime showed that half of women expe-
rience greater fear of crime in public spaces if they are wearing 
revealing clothing or if they are alone (Tandoğan & Şimşek 
İlhan, 2016). Since mass media recently began broadcasting 
news about physical assaults on women dressed in revealing 
clothing, increasingly more Turkish women have experienced 
fear of crime (Internet 1, Internet 2).
External factors affecting fear of crime are not limited to the 
mass media. According to another approach, irregularities in 
the built environment can be interpreted as clues of insecurity 
and are effective in creating fear of crime. Dark, deserted areas 
where trash is not collected, places where there are vandal-
ized structures, or places characterized by an imbalance of men 
Urbani izziv, volume 32, no. 2, 2021
90
and women cause individuals to fear being victimized (Vrij & 
Winkel, 1991; Nasar & Fisher, 1993; Newman, 1996; Kalpana 
& Ashish, 2015). Deserted alleys, dark passages, insufficient 
lighting, isolated urban spaces, and late-night public trans-
port are usually described as conditions or spaces where fear 
of crime is experienced the most (Treske, 1990; Warr, 1990; 
Greene, 2003; Erkan 2015; Tandoğan & Şimşek İlhan, 2016). 
According to Tandoğan and Şimşek İlhan (2016) and Treske 
(1990), women experience fear of crime more in deserted areas 
or when it is dark. In contrast, a study performed in Helsinki 
showed that women thought of winter and summer nights as 
equally dangerous despite the difference in the level of light. 
Their explanation is that, even though winter nights are darker, 
there are more men in public spaces on summer nights because 
of favourable weather (Koskela, 1998). According to this, the 
fear most women experience does not stem from spatial fea-
tures, but from fear of men (Valentine, 1989). This shows that 
women’s fear of crime cannot be removed by simply rectifying 
the space (Koskela & Pain, 2000). As a result, women expe-
rience fear of crime more than men, and this seems to be a 
contributing factor in limiting their participation in public life.
2 Method
2.1 Study area
Kadıköy is a district on the Asian side of Istanbul (Figure 1). 
Kadıköy was selected for this study because, even though it 
has a crowded and diversified user profile, it is considered a 
safe area of Istanbul, especially by women (Bilen et al., 2013; 
Lordoğlu, 2018). This is important because it helps focus on 
fear of crime independently from actual crime rates. A study 
by Lordoğlu (2018) of single women also showed that Kadıköy 
was regarded as the most comfortable district to live in as a 
woman in Istanbul.
Figure 1: Location of and facilities in Kadıköy (illustration: G. E. Albayrak).
N. Ç. ERKAN, B. SEVIN TOPÇU
Urbani izziv, volume 32, no. 2, 2021
91Gender-based differences in fear of crime in public spaces: An investigation of a safe district in Istanbul
As a result of media coverage of women that were attacked 
because of their clothing, protests were held in several parts 
of Istanbul in July 2017, including Kadıköy. These organized 
protests showed the impact of fear of crime in public spaces. 
One reason why this study was carried out in Kadıköy is the 
“do not interfere with my clothes” demonstration. Due to 
the density of both formal and informal social movements, 
Kadıköy is a district that differs significantly from the rest of 
Istanbul in aspects such as socioeconomic variables, culture, 
and nightlife (Figure 2).
The district was defined as a cultural and transfer hub in the 
metropolitan master plan, and it has become more crowded 
and more cosmopolitan in recent years. Due to the impact of 
entertainment, food, and beverage venues, cultural activities 
have gathered pace in Kadıköy. Because of the corresponding 
availability of public transportation (ferry, bus, metro, etc.), 
Kadıköy has gained a large visitor population and has become 
a crowded area that is lively until late at night. According to 
2017 data from TÜİK (the Turkish Statistical Institute), the 
population of the Kadıköy district is 451,453 and the district 
has a daily visitor capacity of more than six times its popu-
lation (Kadıköy District Registry Office, 2017). Kadıköy was 
chosen as a study area to cover the traditional market (with the 
highest visitor population), retail trade areas, entertainment 
venues, the waterfront centre, which is regarded as a transfer 
Figure 2: a) Nightlife (photo: Internet 3); b) Women’s Day celebration 
(photo: Internet 4); c) “Do not interfere with my clothes” demonstra-
tion in Kadıköy (photo: Internet 5).
Figure 3: Waterfront functions in Kadıköy; a) piers (photo: N. Ç. Er-
kan); b) parking space (photo: B. Sevin); c) recreation area (photo: 
F. Çobanoğlu).
a
b
c
a
b
c
Urbani izziv, volume 32, no. 2, 2021
92
centre as well as a recreation area, and the other transportation 
transfer centre on land (Figures 3, 4). This area was observed on 
different days and at different times, and a survey was carried 
out using the methodology explained below.
2.2 Survey
This study focuses on fear of crime among users of a safe public 
space and the differences between men and women in the vul-
nerable group in this regard. It questions the types of locations 
where fear is felt and the conditions that may create fear. Based 
on this, the research questions are: 1) In a safe district, is there 
a difference in fear of crime felt by different genders? 2) Does 
the quality of a public space and its conditions have an effect 
on fear of crime? and 3) Are there gender-based differences 
in the sense of fear in the public space studied, taking into 
account its quality and conditions? Based on these questions 
and the study’s starting point, the hypothesis of the study is 
that women feel more fear of crime in public spaces compared 
to men, independent of the safety of the district.
In light of information about fear of crime and the study area, 
an in-depth survey was conducted to collect the experiences 
and thoughts of the place users in the study area. The survey 
inquired about the following: a) personal information of users 
such as gender, age, and education level, in addition to the 
reasons why they were in Kadıköy or how often they visited; 
b) whether they felt safe in Kadıköy and the locations where 
they experienced fear in Kadıköy, and c) the locations and 
conditions that might be a source of fear. In this third set of 
questions, fifteen locations and nine conditions were defined as 
a source of concern. Participants were asked to evaluate these 
locations and conditions on a five-point Likert scale. The values 
were completely disagree (1), disagree (2), indecisive (3), agree 
(4), and completely agree (5). The participants were free to 
mark as many options as they desired.
These locations and conditions were selected from a group 
of places that cause fear, identified in a 2014 pilot study with 
the participation of sixty women. These locations were main-
ly dark and deserted places where seeing and being seen are 
problems, and crowded places where a criminal can remain 
anonymous. Alleys and main streets were also included in the 
survey, but they are less significant and more neutral in fear 
of crime. The locations selected for evaluation in the study 
are described by their functions and features without actually 
naming various neighbourhoods in the study area. The goal 
here is not to directly label the locations, but to understand 
what these locations represent for the users. A statistically 
meaningful difference was expected to be found between these 
locations. Situations that may occur in any place, independ-
ent of location, were also listed in the questionnaire under 
the heading “conditions”. These conditions are being lost, a 
crowd, deserted areas, darkness, verbal abuse by a stranger, the 
presence of stray animals, the presence of beggars, drug users, 
and so on, a crowd staring at you, and a crowd making noise. 
In this context, gender-based fear of crime was a dependent 
variable, and public locations with certain qualities and certain 
conditions were independent variables.
The survey was carried out in May and June 2017 and was 
collected from 387 respondents, 170 online and 217 in person. 
The validity of the data obtained before the statistical analyses 
for normal distribution was checked by an analysis of skewness 
and kurtosis values. Because these were in a range of ±2, it was 
decided that the data had a normal distribution (George & 
Mallery, 2010). In addition, because the data were collected via 
both face-to-face and web-based methods, whether the groups 
Figure 4: a) People in the commercial area (photo: B. Sevin); b) car-free shopping street (photo: N. Ç. Erkan); c) metro station (photo: B. Sevin).
ba c
N. Ç. ERKAN, B. SEVIN TOPÇU
Urbani izziv, volume 32, no. 2, 2021
93Gender-based differences in fear of crime in public spaces: An investigation of a safe district in Istanbul
showed a similar distribution was checked with the Wald–Wol-
fowitz runs test, and it was concluded that the groups showed 
a similar distribution. Online surveys were applied to include 
users that could not spare time for an in-person survey on 
the street, for younger generations that are comfortable us-
ing social media, and for individuals that avoid communica-
tion with strangers due to fear of crime. Online surveys were 
delivered via social media to individuals connected with the 
Kadıköy district in some way (who live in, work in, or visit 
Kadıköy). The in-person surveys were conducted by interns. A 
non-probability convenience sampling method was used, and 
the surveys were carried out with random users during week-
days and weekends at public spaces in Kadıköy. The number 
of women (n = 237) that participated in the survey is higher 
than the number of men (n = 150). The reason for this is that 
women are more willing to participate in surveys than men, 
and/or because men are more hesitant to express their fears 
(Crawford et al., 1990; Jackson, 2009: 371, 381).
Table 1 shows that 79% of the respondents have an undergrad-
uate or higher degree. Thus, the neighbourhood residents or 
Table 1: Respondents’ gender and education levels, and their reasons for being in Kadıköy.
Criterion and value Female: n (%) Male: n (%) Total: n (%)
Age
15–25 63 (27) 35 (23) 98 (25)
26–35 91 (38) 62 (41) 153 (40)
36–45 51 (22) 24 (16) 75 (19)
46–55 17 (79) 11 (7) 28 (7)
56–65 9 (6) 13 (9) 22 (6)
65+ 6 (14) 5 (24) 11 (17)
Total 237 (100) 150 (100) 387 (100)
Education
Primary school 7 (3) 6 (4) 13 (3)
Secondary vocational school 5 (2) 7 (5) 12 (3)
High school 38 (16) 20 (13) 58 (15)
Bachelor’s 143 (60) 96 (64) 239 (62)
Master’s, PhD 44 (19) 21 (14) 65 (17)
Total 237 (100) 150 (100) 387 (100)
Reason in Kadıköy
Living and working 65 (27) 55 (37) 120 (31)
Other 172 (73) 95 (63) 267 (69)
Total 237 (100) 150 (100) 387 (100)
Total 237 (61.2) 150 (38.8) 387 (100)
Table 2: Gender-based chi-squared analysis for “place feels unsafe”.
           Gender Total χ² SD p
Female Male
Is there any place in Kadıköy where you do not 
feel safe?
No 123 101 224 8.976 1 .003
Yes 114 49 163
Total 237 150 387
Table 3: Correlation between feared spaces and gender.
Locations r p
Public transportation −.209** .000
Bus or minibus stops −.181** .000
Metro stations −.188** .000
Underpasses −.232** .000
Residential areas −.278** .000
Market area at night −.175** .001
Waterfront at night −.280** .000
Park −.215** .000
Parking space −.288** .000
Indoor parking space −.395** .000
Locations with graffiti −.115* .023
Alleys −.177** .000
Main streets −.200** .000
Near venues with alcohol −.273** .000
Near deserted and empty areas −.175** .001
Note: P value of analysis shows it’s statistical significance. Both p<0.05 
and p<0.01 are considered statistically significant while a figure that 
is less than 0.01 is viewed as highly statistically significant (Greenland, 
et al., 2016).
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. 
Urbani izziv, volume 32, no. 2, 2021
94
Table 4: Regression of feared spaces by gender.
Dependent variable Adj. R² F (sig.) β t (sig.) Effect size
Public transportation .041 17.551 (.000) −.209 −4.189 (.000) Small
Bus-minibus stops .030 12.977 (.000) −.181 −3.602 (.000) Small
Metro stations .033 20.499 (.000) −.188 −3.755 (.000) Small
Underpasses .072 31.039 (.000) −.273 −5.571 (.000) Small
Residential areas .028 12.134 (.001) −.175 −3.483 (.001) Small
Market area at night .037 15.984 (.000) −.200 −3.998 (.000) Small
Waterfront at night .051 21.807 (.000) −.232 −4.670 (.000) Small
Alleys .075 32.264 (.000) −.278 −5.680 (.000) Small
Main streets .028 12.097 (.001) −.175 −3.478 (.001) Small
Park .076 32.859 (.000) −.280 −5.732 (.000) Small
Near venues with alcohol .044 18.610 (.000) −.215 −4.314 (.000) Small
Parking space .081 34.862 (.000) −.288 −5.904 (.000) Small
Indoor parking space .154 71.313 (.000) −.395 −8.445 (.000) Medium
Locations with graffiti .011 5.197 (.023) −.115 −2.280 (.023) Small
Near deserted and empty areas .029 12.404 (.000) −.177 −3.522 (.000) Small
Table 5: Correlation between feared conditions and gender.
Conditions r p
Being lost −.206** .000
Crowd −.070 .167
Deserted areas −.348** .000
Darkness −.416** .000
Beggars, addicts, etc. −.253** .000
Verbal abuse by stranger −.427** .000
Presence of stray animals −.094 .064
Crowd staring at you −.279** .000
Crowd making noise −.091 .073
Note: *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
visitors have high levels of education; individuals with a higher 
level of education were more willing to take the survey than 
those without. Thirty-one per cent of the respondents lived or 
worked in Kadıköy, and 69% of the respondents were visitors 
to Kadıköy for various reasons (Table 1).
3 Results
The study investigated whether women and men feel safe 
in Kadıköy. A chi-squared test was conducted to determine 
whether the sense of security is dependent on gender, and the 
dependency between the variables was found to be statistically 
significant (χ² = 8.97; p < .05; Table 2).
When calculating the correlation between the locations where 
fear is felt and gender, all the results are negative and statisti-
cally significant (p < 0.05; Table 3).
Dummy coding was performed to subject the gender variable 
to regression analysis: female = 0, male = 1. Therefore, be-
ing a man has a negative effect and men score lower on these 
questions. In the regression analysis, it was observed that the 
independent variable “gender” explained all the variables re-
lated to spaces in a meaningful way. Among these, the greatest 
effect was determined for the variable “indoor parking space” 
(R² = .154, F(1, 385) = 71.31, p < .001). The variable “gender” 
provides a significant estimation of the variable “indoor park-
ing space” (β = −.395, t (385) = −8.445, p < .001; Table 4).
In the correlation analysis, the correlation between gender and 
“crowd”, “presence of stray animals”, and “crowd making noise” 
was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). For this reason, these 
variables were not included in the regression analysis (Table 5).
In the regression analysis, dummy coding was used to under-
stand the effect of being male. For this reason, the data were re-
coded as female = 0 and male = 1. The results of the regression 
analysis showed that being male had a negative effect (Table 6). 
This shows that women have higher scores on these conditions, 
whereas men scored less. In this analysis, the independent var-
iable “gender” explained all the variables in a meaningful way. 
However, the effect size of the variables “deserted areas” (R² 
= .040, F(1, 385) = 17.07, p < .001), “darkness” (R² = .171, 
F(1, 385) = 80.73, p < .001), and “verbal abuse” (R² = .181, 
F(1, 385) = 86.08, p < .001) are higher than other variables. 
Regression analysis was not performed because there is no sig-
nificant correlation between the presence of stray animals, a 
crowd making noise, and crowds.
In the analyses conducted, the variable “gender” has a negative 
and statistically significant correlation with each location and 
condition. Being a man has a negative effect in these conditions 
and reduces fear scores. However, the variable “gender” has the 
N. Ç. ERKAN, B. SEVIN TOPÇU
Urbani izziv, volume 32, no. 2, 2021
95
highest explanatory correlation with the variable “verbal abuse 
by stranger”. In other words, women are frightened by “verbal 
abuse by stranger” more than by other conditions.
4 Discussion
This study investigated the relationship between gender and 
locations and conditions that cause fear of crime in public 
spaces. The results show that, even though a public space is 
known to be safe, women feel more fear than men under any 
circumstance. According to a study conducted in Istanbul, the 
percentage of people that think they cannot act freely and 
safely due to fear of being victimized was 79% (Kul, 2013: 86; 
Karasu, 2017: 63). However, the results of this study show that 
the percentage of people that feel unsafe in certain districts of 
Kadıköy is 42.1%. According to these data, Kadıköy is safer 
compared to the entire Istanbul metropolitan area. On the 
other hand, 70% of the participants that felt unsafe in Kadıköy 
are women. This result shows that women experience the feel-
ing of insecurity more than men. According to the results of 
a 2016 TÜİK report on life satisfaction, the percentage of 
people feeling in danger while walking alone at night in the 
districts where they live was 26.2%; this percentage was 15.2% 
among men and 37% among women. The percentage of people 
feeling safe in the area they lived was 71% among men and 
47.5% among women. From these data, it can also be seen that 
women experience a feeling of insecurity more than men. In 
other words, this study found that there is a significant corre-
lation between gender and sense of security, and that women 
have a higher rate of feeling unsafe.
One question the study sought to answer was the effect that the 
qualities and conditions of public spaces had on fear of crime. 
It was shown that qualities and conditions such as desolation 
and darkness have an effect on fear of crime. One outstanding 
issue in the study is a contradiction regarding the results ob-
tained for deserted areas. Although no difference was found 
between men and women regarding fear felt in deserted areas, 
it was observed that the factor “deserted areas” had an effect 
varying from small to medium in the regression analysis. How-
ever, the analysis showed a p value of 0.073 for the variable 
“deserted areas”, which indicates that the correlation is partial-
ly significant. If more participants had been included in the 
study, this value may have reached a statistically significant level 
(Pritschet et al., 2016). As a result, it is observed that locations 
such as indoor parking spaces and desolate areas cause fear, 
and women are more affected than men by conditions such as 
darkness, where visibility is problematic, and by verbal abuse. 
In a study conducted among women in Istanbul, it was found 
that women are most fearful of physical harassment (42%) and 
dark streets (11.4%). They also fear being assaulted (9.24%) 
in public places (Erkan, 2015). In a study by Tandoğan and 
Şimşek İlhan (2016) investigating fear of crime among female 
city dwellers, 88.0% of women were afraid in deserted/quiet 
streets and roads at night. These results are also consistent with 
the results obtained in this study.
It has been concluded that fears such as gender-based verbal 
abuse are more prominent among fears that shape female be-
haviour in public spaces. Research by Tandoğan and Şimşek 
İlhan (2016) reveals that verbal abuse by a stranger (63.4%) is a 
very common situation in Istanbul. In the interviews conduct-
ed in this study, some young female university students stated 
that they wear headphones when they are alone in order not 
to hear verbal abuse or to pretend not to hear it. Sometimes 
gazes in public spaces can be as offensive as verbal abuse, and 
they restrict women’s behaviour. Because the boundaries of 
harassment applied to women in a male-dominated society 
cannot be defined very clearly (although “looking” and “verbal 
abuse” can be taken for granted by women in some cases), 
such behaviours nevertheless continue to be a source of fear.
5 Conclusion
Although women are safer and feel free in Kadıköy compared 
to other districts of Istanbul, it has been determined that they 
still have a fear of crime. As seen in similar studies about fear 
of crime, gender is an important factor affecting fear of crime 
in public spaces. Urban planning and urban design regulations 
can produce solutions to overcome fear of crime, which is a 
feature of urban spaces. However, research shows that regulat-
ing urban spaces is not enough. The study confirmed that some 
Table 6: Regression of feared conditions by gender.
Dependent variable Adj. R² F (sig.) β t (sig.) Effect size
Being lost .040 17.071 (.000) −.206 −4.132 (.000) Small
Deserted areas .119 52.919 (.000) −.348 −7.275 (.000) Small to medium
Darkness .171 80.736 (.000) −.416 −8.985 (.000) Medium
Beggars, addicts, etc. .061 26.258 (.000) −.253 −5.124 (.000) Small
Verbal abuse by stranger .181 86.084 (.000) −.427 −9.278 (.000) Medium
Crowd staring at you .076 32.566 (.000) −.279 −5.707 (.000) Small
Gender-based differences in fear of crime in public spaces: An investigation of a safe district in Istanbul
Urbani izziv, volume 32, no. 2, 2021
96
social precautions should be taken, especially in preventing fear 
of crime among women.
It should be noted that the research discussed in this article has 
certain limitations. The high level of education of individuals 
that voluntarily participated in the research does not reflect 
the general situation of Istanbul. Therefore, the results of this 
study cannot be generalized for Istanbul. The next step of the 
study will be to compare fear of crime in a safe district with 
an unsafe district and to investigate the gender differences in 
fear of crime felt in these areas.
Nilgün Çolpan Erkan
Yıldız Technical University, Faculty of Architecture, Department of 
Urban and Regional Planning, Istanbul, Turkey
E-mail: nilgunerkan@gmail.com
Beril Sevin Topçu
 Municipality of Kadıköy, Istanbul, Turkey
E-mail: berilsevin@gmail.com
Acknowledgment
The authors of this study thank Kağan Güney for his support in the 
statistical calculations for the study, and Meryem Çağış and Ebru 
Çakmak for their assistance in conducting the survey in the field.
References
Bilen, Ö., Aşkın, Ö. E., Büyüklü, A. H., Ökten, A. & Mehmet, G. Ü. R. 
(2013) How the fear of crime spatially differs among the districts of 
Istanbul? Social Sciences, 8(4), pp. 153–164.  
DOI: 10.12739/NWSA.2013.8.4.3C0115
Callanan, V. & Rosenberger, J. S. (2015) Media, gender, and 
fear of crime. Criminal Justice Review, 40(3), pp. 322–339. 
DOI: 10.1177/0734016815573308
Çardak, B. (2012) Kadınların Suç Korkuları Üzerine Nitel Bir Çalışma. 
Güvenlik Bilimleri Dergisi, 1(1), pp. 23–45. DOI: 10.28956/gbd.239715
Covington, J. & Taylor, R. (1991) Fear of crime in urban residential 
neighborhoods: Implications of between- and within-neighborhood 
sources for current models. The Sociological Quarterly, 32(2), pp. 231–
249. DOI: 10.1111/j.1533-8525.1991.tb00355.x
Crawford, A., Jones, T., Woodhouse, T. & Young, J. (1990) The second 
Islington crime survey. London, Centre for Criminology, Middlesex Poly-
technic.
Dolu, O., Uludağ, Ş. & Doğutaş, C. (2010) Suç Korkusu: Nedenleri, 
Sonuçları ve Güvenlik Politikaları İlişkisi. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi. 
65(1), pp. 58–81. DOI: 10.1501/SBFder_0000002154
Erkan, N. Ç. (2015) Büyük Kentlerde Kadınların Korku Mekanları. In: 
Solak, A. & Solak, Ö. (eds.) Gündelik Hayat Sosyolojisi Açısından Suç ve 
Suç Korkusu, pp. 401–411. Ankara, Hegem Yayınları.
Ferraro, K. F. (1995) Fear of crime: Interpreting victimization risk. Albany, 
State University of New York Press. 
Ferraro, K. F. & LaGrange, R. L. (1987) The measurement of fear of crime, 
Sociological Inquiry, 57(1), pp. 70–97.  
DOI:10.1111/j.1475-682x.1987.tb01181.x
Ferraro, K. F. & LaGrange, R. L. (1992) Are older people most afraid of 
crime? Reconsidering age differences in fear of victimization. Journal of 
Gerontology, 47(5), pp. 233–244. DOI: 10.1093/geronj/47.5.s233
Foster, S., Giles-Corti, B. & Knuiman, M. (2010) Neighbourhood design 
and fear of crime: A social-ecological examination of the correlates of 
residents? Fear in new suburban housing developments. Health & Place, 
16(6), pp. 1156–1165. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2010.07.007
Franklin, T. W., Franklin, C. A. & Fearn, N. E. (2008) A multilevel analysis 
of the vulnerability, disorder, and social integration models of fear of 
crime. Social Justice Research, 21(2), pp. 204–227.  
DOI: 10.1007/s11211-008-0069-9
Furstenberg, F. F., Jr. (1971) Public reaction to crime in the streets. The 
American Scholar, 40, pp. 601–610.
Garofalo, J. (1981) The fear of crime: Causes and consequences. 
The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 72(2), pp. 839–857. 
DOI: 10.2307/1143018
George, D. & Mallery, M. (2010) SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple 
guide and reference, 17.0 update (10th ed.). Boston, Pearson.
Gilchrist, E., Bannister, J., Ditton, J. & Farrall, S. (1998) Women and the 
“fear of crime”: Challenging the accepted stereotype. The British Journal 
of Criminology, 38(2), pp. 283–298.  
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a014236
Gray, E., Jackson, J. & Farrall, S. (2011) Feelings and functions in the fear 
of crime, applying a new approach to victimisation insecurity. British 
Journal of Criminology, 51, pp. 75–94. DOI: 10.1093/bjc/azq066
Greene, M. (2003) Urban safety in residential areas: Spatial variables in 
crime and feeling of (in)security. Paper presented at the World Bank 
Urban Research Symposium, 15–17 December, Washington, DC. Type-
script.
Hale, C. (1993) Fear of crime: A review of the literature, report to the 
Metropolitan Police Service Working Party on the Fear of Crime. Research 
report. Canterbury, Canterbury Business School, University of Kent.
Internet 1: http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/turkiye/607721/
Sort_giyen_kadina_tekme_atan_saldirganin_korkunc_sozleri__Kafasi-
ni_koparmak_lazim.html (accessed 3 Jun. 2021).
Internet 2: http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/turkiye/765079/
Yine_sortlu_kadina_saldiri Ramazan_da_boyle_giyinmeye_utanmiyor_
musun__diyerek_yuzume_yumruk_atti.html (accessed 3 Jun. 2021).
Internet 3: https://listelist.com/kadikoyde-yasama-nedenleri/ (accessed 
8 Jul. 2021).
Internet 4: https://www.indyturk.com (accessed 8 Jul. 2021).
Internet 5: http://www.gazetekadikoy.com.tr/gundem/kiyafetime-sortu-
ma-hayatima-karisma-h10956.html (accessed 2 Oct. 2021).
Jackson, J. (2009) A psychological perspective on vulnerability 
in the fear of crime. Psychology, Crime & Law, 15(4), pp. 365–390. 
DOI: 10.1080/10683160802275797
Kalpana, V. & Ashish B. (2015) SafetiPin: An innovative mobile app to 
collect data on women’s safety in Indian cities, Gender & Development, 
23(1), pp. 45–60. DOI: 10.1080/13552074.2015.1013669
Karal, D. & Aydemir, E. (2012) Türkiye’de Kadına Yönelik Şiddet, USAK Sosy-
al Araştırmalar Merkezi Raporu 12-01. Research report. Ankara, Uluslarar-
ası Stratejik Araştırmalar Kurumu.
Kohm, S. A., Waid-Lindberg, A., Weinrath, M., Shelley, T. O. C. & Dobbs, 
R. R. (2012) The impact of media on fear of crime among university 
students: A cross-national comparison. Canadian Journal of Criminology 
and Criminal Justice 54, pp. 67–100. DOI: 10.3138/cjccj.2011.E.01
N. Ç. ERKAN, B. SEVIN TOPÇU
Urbani izziv, volume 32, no. 2, 2021
97
Koskela, H. (1997) “Bold walk and breakings”: Women’s spatial confi-
dence versus fear of violence. Gender, Place and Culture, 4, pp. 301–319. 
DOI: 10.1080/09663699725369
Koskela, H. (1999) “Gendered exclusions”: Women’s fear of violence and 
changing relations to space. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geog-
raphy, 81(2), pp. 111–124. DOI: 10.1111/j.0435-3684.1999.00052.x
Kul, M. (2013) Suçtan Daha Büyük Suç Korkusu, İstanbul’da Bir Alan 
Araştırması. Istanbul, Yeniyüzyıl Yayınları.
Lordoğlu, C. (2018) İstanbul’da Bekar Kadın Olmak. Istanbul, İletişim 
Yayınları.
Macmillan, R., Nierobisz, A. & Welsh, S. (2000) Experiencing the streets: 
Harassment and perceptions of safety among women. Journal of Re-
search in Crime and Delinquency, 37, pp. 306–322.  
DOI: 10.1177/0022427800037003003
Mirrlees-Black, C, Mayhew, P. & Percy, A. (1996) The 1996 British Crime 
Survey: England and Wales. London, Home Office.
Nasar, J. İ. & Fisher, B. (1993) “Hot spots” of fear and crime: A mul-
ti-method investigation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 13, pp. 
187–206. DOI: 10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80173-2
Newman, O. (1996) Creating defensible space. Washington, DC, Depart-
ment of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Develop-
ment and Research.
Otis, M. D. (2007) Perceptions of victimization risk and fear of crime 
among lesbians and gay men. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22(2), 
pp. 198–217. DOI: 10.1177/0886260506295346
Öztürk, M., Kocacık, F. & Gönültaş, M. (2016) Suç korkusu ve risk al-
gısının toplumsal cinsiyet açısından incelenmesi. Journal of Human 
Sciences, 13(1), pp. 1488–1502. DOI: 10.14687/ijhs.v13i1.3691
Pain, R. (1991) Space, sexual violence and social control: Integrating ge-
ographical and feminist analyses of women’s fear of crime. Progress in 
Human Geography, 15, pp. 415–431. DOI: 10.1177/030913259101500403
Pain, R. (2001) Gender, race, age and fear in the city. Urban Studies, 
38(5–6), pp. 899–913. DOI: 10.1080/00420980120046590
Pritschet, L., Powell, D. & Horne, Z. (2016) Marginally signifi-
cant effects as evidence for hypotheses: Changing attitudes 
over four decades. Psychological Science, 27(7), pp. 1036–1042. 
DOI: 10.1177/0956797616645672
Ravenscroft, N., Uzzell, D. & Leach, R. (2002) Danger ahead? The impact 
of fear of crime on people’s recreational use of nonmotorised shared-
use routes. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 20, pp. 
741–756. DOI: 10.1068/c24m
Ross, C. E. (1993) Fear of victimization and health. Journal of Quantita-
tive Criminology, 9, pp. 159–175. DOI: 10.1007/BF01071166
Ross, C. E. & Jang, S. J. (2000) Neighborhood disorder, fear, 
and mistrust: The buffering role of social ties with neighbors. 
American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, pp. 401–420. 
DOI: 10.1023/A:1005137713332
Sacco, V. F. (1993) Social support and the fear of crime. Canadian Jour-
nal of Criminology, 35, pp. 187–196. DOI: 10.3138/cjcrim.35.2.187
Sallan Gül, S. & Altındal, Y. (2015) Kadın Cinayetlerinin ve Suç Korkus-
unun Görseller Üzerinden Medyada Yeniden Üretimi: Radikal Gaze-
tesi Örneği. In: Solak, A. & Solak, Ö. (eds.) Gündelik Hayat Sosyolojisi 
Açısından Suç ve Suç Korkusu, pp. 536–557. Ankara, Hegem Yayınları.
Sandberg, L. & Rönnblom, M. (2013) Afraid and restricted vs bold 
and equal: Women’s fear of violence and gender equality discourses 
in Sweden. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 20(2), pp. 189–203. 
DOI: 10.1177/1350506812463911
Smolej, M. & Janne K. (2006) The relation between crime news and fear 
of violence. Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime 
Prevention, 7(2), pp. 211–227. DOI: 10.1080/14043850601002429
Sutton, R. M., Robinson B. & Farrall S. D. (2011) Gender, fear of crime, 
and self-presentation: An experimental investigation. Psychology, Crime 
& Law, 17(5), pp. 421–433. DOI: 10.1080/10683160903292261
Tandoğan, O. & Simsek Ilhan, B. (2016) Fear of crime in public spaces: 
From the view of women living in cities. Procedia Engineering, 161, pp. 
2011–2018. DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.2016.08.795
Taylor, R. B. & Hale. M. (1986) Testing alternative models of fear of 
crime. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 77, pp. 151–189. 
DOI: 10.2307/1143593
Tığlı, N. (2019) Türkiye’de Kadın Cinayetleri Raporu, 01.01.2016–31.12.2018. 
Research report. Ankara, TBMM Kadın Erkek Fırsat Eşitliği Komisyonu 
Çalışması,
Treske, M., et al. (1990) Frauen Angst Rüume – ein Fotodokumentation. 
Frankfurt, AK Frauenraeume.
TÜİK (2016) İstatistiklerle Kadın Raporu. Research report. Ankara.
Uçan, A., et al. (2016) Türkiye’de Erkek Şiddetiyle Mücadele Mekanizmaları 
İzleme Raporu. Research report. Istanbul, Mor Çatı Yayınları.
Uludağ, Ş. (2010) Vatandaşların Suç Korku (Güvenlik Endişesi) Seviyesi-
ne Etki Eden Faktörler ve Alınabilecek Önlemler: Malatya Örneği. Polis 
Bilimleri Dergisi, 12(1), pp. 1–28.
Valentine, G. (1989) The geography of women’s fear. Area, 21(4), pp. 
385–390.
Valentine, G. (1992) Images of danger: Women’s sources of information 
about the spatial distribution of male violence. Area, 24(1), pp. 22–29.
Vrij, A. & Winkel, F. W. (1991) Characteristics of the built environment 
and fear of crime: A research note on interventions in unsafe locations. 
Deviant Behaviour, 12, pp. 203–215. DOI: 10.1080/01639625.1991.9967
873
Ward, R. A., LaGory, M. & Sherman, S. R. (1990) Fear of crime among the 
elderly as person/environment interaction. The Sociological Quarterly, 
27(3), pp. 327–341. DOI: 10.1111/j.1533-8525.1986.tb00264.x
Warr, M. (1984) Fear of victimization: Why are women and the elderly 
more afraid? Social Science Quarterly, 65(3), pp. 681–702.
Warr, M. (1990) Dangerous situations: Social context and fear of victimi-
zation. Social Forces, 68(3), pp. 891–907. DOI: 10.2307/2579359
Yirmibeşoğlu, F. & Ergun, N. (2015) Fear of crime among women in the 
old city center of Istanbul. Current Urban Studies, 3(2), pp. 161–174. 
DOI: 10.4236/cus.2015.32014
Gender-based differences in fear of crime in public spaces: An investigation of a safe district in Istanbul