Crime-Type Victimization and Perceived Possibility of Future Victimization in Peru

Peru faces a crime perception–reality gap of 58.9% points (86.0% perceived possibility vs. 27.1% victimization), suggesting that avoidance and defensive behaviors may arise not only among victims, but also among people who regard victimization as a plausible future event. Prior victimization is expected to be associated with higher perceived possibility. However, we provide disaggregated evidence on how victimization relates to perceived possibility across two crime types: property crimes and crimes against the person. Using nationally representative ENAPRES 2024 microdata, we estimate survey-weighted logistic models for each crime type. Victimization in crimes against the person is associated with a higher perceived possibility of the same type of crime, with an estimated association almost three times larger than that observed between property-crime victimization and perceived possibility of property crime. We also find cross-over evidence, where being a victim of one type of crime is associated with a higher perceived possibility of the other type of crime. Heterogeneity analysis shows distinct gender–age profiles. Robustness checks with sequential modeling and propensity score matching support our results. These findings inform the crime-versus-perception policy dilemma and support strategies balancing impact with the differing costs of addressing perceptions across crime types.