Matching Items (11)
Filtering by
- Creators: Department of Psychology
Description
Inmate misconduct, and the formal disciplinary proceeding that follow official misconduct, is a common occurrence within correctional institutions. Decisions regarding punishment sanction post-disciplinary proceeding are important because they have direct implications for inmate freedom of movement within the institutional setting, yet this decision point has rarely been the subject of empirical research. Research that does look at this decision point commonly focuses on the presence or absence of a single category of disciplinary punishment – that being solitary confinement or disciplinary segregation. As such, prior research fails to observe the full range of post-disciplinary punishment options.
Addressing this gap in the literature, this study provides the first rigorous empirical examination of the inmate-level characteristics that influence punishment outcome following guilty institutional misconduct proceedings. Guided by criminal sentencing literature, the inmate- level characteristics are divided into groups of legal factors, quasi-legal factors, and extra-legal factors. Representing a significant advancement beyond prior research, this study operationalizes punishment outcome in two ways – as an interval-level ordered sanction severity scale and as individual punishment categories. A series of multivariate models with sample selection corrections are estimated to model the direct and interactive effects of the legal, quasi-legal, and extra-legal inmate characteristics on punishment outcome.
Results of the fully-saturated direct effects models reveal a consistent pattern across both operationalizations of the punishment outcome. The legal factor of misconduct offense and the prosocial behavior quasi-legal factors of working a prison job and program involvement are significantly related to punishment outcomes. The quasi-legal factor representing criminogenic risk and the extra-legal factors of inmate gender and race/ethnicity are not significantly related to punishment outcomes. When the direct effects models re-estimated on samples split by inmate gender and race/ethnicity, however, the extra-legal factors of gender and race/ethnicity condition the effects of some of the legal and quasi-legal factors on punishment outcome. Results of this study suggest that, holding constant the effect of legal misconduct-related factors, disparities exist in post-disciplinary sanctioning based on inmate race/ethnicity and gender.
Addressing this gap in the literature, this study provides the first rigorous empirical examination of the inmate-level characteristics that influence punishment outcome following guilty institutional misconduct proceedings. Guided by criminal sentencing literature, the inmate- level characteristics are divided into groups of legal factors, quasi-legal factors, and extra-legal factors. Representing a significant advancement beyond prior research, this study operationalizes punishment outcome in two ways – as an interval-level ordered sanction severity scale and as individual punishment categories. A series of multivariate models with sample selection corrections are estimated to model the direct and interactive effects of the legal, quasi-legal, and extra-legal inmate characteristics on punishment outcome.
Results of the fully-saturated direct effects models reveal a consistent pattern across both operationalizations of the punishment outcome. The legal factor of misconduct offense and the prosocial behavior quasi-legal factors of working a prison job and program involvement are significantly related to punishment outcomes. The quasi-legal factor representing criminogenic risk and the extra-legal factors of inmate gender and race/ethnicity are not significantly related to punishment outcomes. When the direct effects models re-estimated on samples split by inmate gender and race/ethnicity, however, the extra-legal factors of gender and race/ethnicity condition the effects of some of the legal and quasi-legal factors on punishment outcome. Results of this study suggest that, holding constant the effect of legal misconduct-related factors, disparities exist in post-disciplinary sanctioning based on inmate race/ethnicity and gender.
ContributorsGinsburg Kempany, Katherine (Author) / Hepburn, John R. (Thesis advisor) / Reisig, Michael D (Committee member) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
This paper presents the design and evaluation of a haptic interface for augmenting human-human interpersonal interactions by delivering facial expressions of an interaction partner to an individual who is blind using a visual-to-tactile mapping of facial action units and emotions. Pancake shaftless vibration motors are mounted on the back of a chair to provide vibrotactile stimulation in the context of a dyadic (one-on-one) interaction across a table. This work explores the design of spatiotemporal vibration patterns that can be used to convey the basic building blocks of facial movements according to the Facial Action Unit Coding System. A behavioral study was conducted to explore the factors that influence the naturalness of conveying affect using vibrotactile cues.
ContributorsBala, Shantanu (Author) / Panchanathan, Sethuraman (Thesis director) / McDaniel, Troy (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Computer Science and Engineering Program (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor)
Created2014-05
Description
Police use of force has become a topic of national discussion, particularly in the wake of the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner. Currently, the focus seems to be on individual officers and their individual attitudes and beliefs. Given that use of force is an individual decision it is intuitive to think that an officer's decision to use force would be impacted by his or her attitudes and beliefs. This reasoning ignores the larger social and organizational contexts within which police officers are situated. Specifically, an officer's peer culture and department may exert control over his or her attitudes and behaviors regarding use of force. The purpose of the current study is to determine whether these larger social contexts impact an individual's perceptions regarding use of force. Using data from a nationally representative survey sample, the study finds that individual attitudes significantly predict officers' willingness to report another officer's excessive use of force. However, this relationship weakens when including measures of peer culture and departmental influence. These findings suggest that perceptions of use of force are influenced by more than just individual attitudes towards use of force. Limitations and future research suggestions are discussed.
ContributorsMorse, Stephanie Jean (Author) / Wright, Kevin (Thesis director) / Ready, Justin (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor)
Created2015-05
Description
The United States has become home to the largest incarcerated population in the world, containing 25% of the world's prisoners (NAACP, 2013). Within this population, young men of color appear to be severely overrepresented. This phenomenon can be better understood with the aid of a multi-disciplinary approach within the social sciences. Evolutionary theory is combined with multiple psychological and sociological perspectives, in order to more deeply understand the multi-level intersection of prejudice and discrimination against society's disadvantaged or vulnerable populations. A synthesis of the multiple theoretical angles of social dominance theory, affordance management, and life history theory is used to suggest a threat-based, attributional framework for understanding punitive decision-making and policy support. This conceptualization also considers the importance of the legal system in effecting social change. Future research within the legal arena is recommended to enable a more refined understanding of punitive ideology and implicit bias within the criminal justice system.
ContributorsLeiferman, Lindsay M (Author) / Szeli, Ãâ°va (Thesis director) / Gómez, Alan (Committee member) / Neuberg, Steven (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor)
Created2014-05
Description
The purpose of this project was to evaluate possible adjudicative causes of wrongful convictions, which were strictly defined as cases where a defendant is convicted for a crime in which they are factually innocent. Most of the existing research on the causes of wrongful convictions suggests that errors occur during the investigative process. However, there is little to no research on how the court system, whose purpose is to catch and correct these mistakes prior to sentencing, fails to do just that. As such, a few possible adjudicative causes were proposed based on existing literature: errors in expert witness testimony, prosecutorial misconduct, representation by the defense, and race. Interview questions were generated based on each of these topics. Four attorneys \u2014 two prosecutors, one public defender, and one private defense attorney \u2014 were interviewed with these questions in order to qualitatively evaluate the legitimacy and the accuracy of these proposed adjudicative causes. The results indicated that attorneys rely on (and believe that jurors rely heavily on) an expert witness' performance rather than their statements and that race does not play a role in the likelihood that a defendant will be wrongfully convicted. Likewise, all four attorneys indicated that both prosecutors and defense attorneys are eager to pursue justice and that no one person is to blame for a wrongful conviction. In conclusion, errors made in the adjudicative process that lead to wrongful convictions might simply be the cause of human error.
ContributorsHietala, Kira Victoria (Author) / DeCarolis, Claudine (Thesis director) / Szeli, Eva (Committee member) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-12
Description
In an attempt to fix the problem of an abundance of individuals with mental health issues in the criminal justice system, mental health courts have begun to develop as the newest form of problem-solving court. These courts aim to keep individuals with easily treatable mental health issues out of prison and connect them with the treatment that they need. This paper is a literature review examining the development and implementation of mental health courts across the United States. The paper first explains the essential elements to a mental health court and how they function. The main claim addressed is that: through the institution of statewide standards as well as the blanket adoption and regular measurement of national performance measures in each accredited mental health court, the large-scale and longitudinal study of mental health courts will become more practical. When these types of studies become more prevalent, the most effective practices of mental health courts will be identified and innovation will follow. The paper develops this claim by explaining the state and national regulations currently in place and the importance of standardization. It then moves into the national performance measures that should then be examined by courts once state standards are in place. The paper then explains the importance of longitudinal study to the proper collection of the significant data needed to solidify the institution of successful mental health courts. By identifying the most effective practices in mental health courts and standardizing them, this system will be able to: better help the individuals involved get appropriate treatment, promote public safety, and more effectively use taxpayer money.
ContributorsSanta Cruz, Ignacio Luis (Author) / Rigoni, Adam (Thesis director) / Kingsbury, Jeffrey (Committee member) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
Description
Teacher assessments are often used alongside parent assessments to identify behavioral problems and patterns in school-aged children. These assessments can aid in the diagnosis of disruptive behavior disorders and are used to screen children for targeted delinquency prevention programs. Although researchers have heavily studied the relationship between parent and teacher assessments, not as much research has analyzed teacher assessments alone, specifically semiannual teacher assessments. Teacher assessments are typically conducted during the fall semester, normally a couple months into the school year, or during the spring semester, normally a couple months after the winter break period. Using data from the Pittsburgh Youth Study (PYS), we aimed to determine the temporal stability and predictive utility of semiannual teacher assessments of children's behavioral problems from 2nd grade to 5th grade. Results showed that mean assessment scores increased from the fall to the spring semester across all 4 grades. We also found that teacher assessments of behavioral problems in grade school were significantly correlated with future serious violence. Although our statistical model did not identify a specific time period or semester when these assessments were most predictive, we observed a pattern where the spring semesters were more predictive for the younger grades, and the fall semesters were more predictive for the older grades. Future research could aim to understand why this pattern exists and what its implications are.
ContributorsForthun, Marisa Nicole (Author) / Pardini, Dustin (Thesis director) / Glenberg, Arthur (Committee member) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-12
Description
My project is designed to provide art education to incarcerated youth in Arizona. This project will address two current issues in Arizona; the underfunding of art programs and high rates of incarceration. As of 2021, there are no state-funded art programs in Arizona. Arizona is tied with Texas for the eighth highest rate of incarceration in the country. In Arizona, 750 out of every 100,000 people are incarcerated. This project is an art course for incarcerated youth. The project includes a packet detailing the course content and assignment details, a class syllabus, a course flyer, and a certificate of completion. The course is intended to be taught at the Adobe Mountain School facility. The course is designed so that it can be implemented in other facilities in the future. The class will be taught by volunteers with a background in studio art, design, or art education. Each student will receive a course packet that they can use to keep track of information and assignments. Instructors will use the course packet to teach the class. The course focuses on drawing with charcoal and oil pastel, which will build a foundation in drawing skills. The course covers a twelve-week semester. The course content packet includes a week-by-week breakdown of the teaching material and project descriptions. The course consists of two main projects and preparatory work. The preparatory work includes vocabulary terms, art concepts, drawing guides, brainstorming activities, and drawing activities. The two main prompts are designed for students to explore the materials and to encourage self-reflection. The class is curated so that students can create art in a low-risk, non-judgemental environment. The course will also focus on establishing problem-solving and critical thinking skills through engaging activities.
ContributorsSheppard, Eve (Author) / Cornelia, Wells (Thesis director) / Jennifer, Nelson (Committee member) / School of Art (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
Description
A polygraph exam attempts to measure “truthfulness” based on several physiological factors—such as changes in heart rate, breathing, sweating, and other physical responses. Ever since the polygraph exam was invented in 1921, however, it has been surrounded by heavy controversy. The largest controversy is whether or not polygraph exams are scientifically valid. Aside from debate over whether “truthfulness” can actually be scientifically measured, polygraph testing is vulnerable to factors like the skill level of the examiner, the IQ of the subject, the setting of the exam, and finally, the ability for subjects to employ “countermeasures.” Countermeasures include physical movements, mental exercises, drug use, and biofeedback training. In addition to these drawbacks, the polygraph exam is not admissible in court. Despite this, the polygraph can still serve other purposes—anywhere from assisting in the law enforcement hiring process to classifying the behavior of convicted sex offenders. Polygraph examinations may be administered at various points during a criminal investigation, both pre-conviction and post-conviction. For example, when a criminal investigation first begins, a subject may be polygraphed to be eliminated as a suspect. Once charges are filed against an individual for an offense, law enforcement may polygraph the subject to obtain more information. After conviction, an offender may be polygraphed at various points during their incarceration, as a part of research studies, as well as part of monitoring sex offenders. In the United States, more than thirty states require that polygraph exams be administered to monitor sex offenders. These periodic exams help track sexual offender’s therapeutic progress, identify risk factors, and shed light on any new offenses. This thesis paper provides a synthesis of the current state of literature surrounding the use of post-conviction polygraphs on sex offenders by outlining the numerous advantages and disadvantages.
ContributorsBlakley, Audrey Kay (Author) / Fox, Kate (Thesis director) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / School of Accountancy (Contributor) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05
Description
The purpose of this project was to explore whether perceptual differences exist between meth, marijuana, and alcohol users who acknowledge that they have a substance abuse problem and those who do not acknowledge that they have a substance abuse problem. Additionally, this project was taken a step further to analyze whether these differences changed as harder drug users were progressively phased out of the sample. The data for this project were obtained from a larger study conducted through ASU. The larger study collected questionnaire data from over 400 incarcerated men at the Arizona State Prison Complex in Florence. Two samples were created to assess differences between users who acknowledge that they have a substance abuse problem and those who do not. The purpose of the first sample was to explore whether differences exist between meth, marijuana, and alcohol users when “hard” drug users are progressively eliminated from the sample. The purpose of the second sample was to get a more comprehensive look at all individuals who marked that they used either meth, marijuana, or alcohol. The data showed that there are no apparent differences between meth, marijuana, and alcohol users who acknowledge that they have a substance abuse problem, but that there may be differences between those who do not acknowledge a substance abuse problem.
ContributorsJohnson, Brianna Marie (Author) / Wright, Kevin (Thesis director) / Chamberlain, Alyssa (Committee member) / Barnhart, Patricia (Committee member) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor, Contributor) / Dean, W.P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05