Matching Items (4)
Filtering by
- Genre: Masters Thesis
- Member of: ASU Electronic Theses and Dissertations
- Member of: Theses and Dissertations
- Status: Published
Description
The purpose of this preliminary study is to determine if sentencing disparities exist between male and female teachers who have been convicted of sexual misconduct with a student in Maricopa County, Arizona over a ten-year period. The hypothesis is that male teachers convicted of sexual misconduct with a student will receive harsher punishment than their female counterparts. In addition, this research will analyze the sentencing decisions of Arizona judges and prosecutors through plea-bargaining when compared with the presumptive sentence set by the Arizona Legislature. Issues that will be addressed include: a brief review of gender disparities in sentencing, sex offender sentencing, Arizona's rules of criminal procedure, and a review of the Arizona Revised Statutes pertaining to sexual crimes as well as the Arizona Supreme Court sentencing guidelines. The data set consists of fifteen different Maricopa County teachers who committed a sexual offense against a student and were convicted of that offense from February 2000 through September 2009. According to the results of this study, male teachers do receive harsher penalties than their female counterparts within Maricopa County.
ContributorsSimmon, Christopher (Author) / Holtfreter, Kristy (Thesis advisor) / Wright, Kevin (Committee member) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
While there is a good amount of research focused on sex offenders as a whole, only a limited number of studies examine variations within these offenders, how people view the variations, and why their opinions may differ. This study focuses on the interconnections among gender norms, rape myth acceptance, and the perception of sex offenders by administering an online student survey. The survey measured rape myth acceptance and adherence to traditional gender roles to see how they affected perceptions of sex offenders. Perceptions were measured using vignettes that were varied by gender and the situation described. Results showed that higher rape myth acceptance would decrease the blameworthiness of the offender, that the offender was seen as more blameworthy when the offender was a male, and that women tended to see the offender as more blameworthy than men did. The type of sexual situation did not have an impact on blameworthiness, nor did adherence to gender roles. The findings support past research that suggests that rape myth acceptance can impact people’s opinions about offenders in sexual situations and specifically that these opinions differ depending on the gender of the offender. With some offenders being viewed as more blameworthy than others, it is necessary to examine sex offense laws to see how they may disproportionately affect some offenders and implement harsher punishments than the public may deem necessary.
ContributorsArenas, Lauren (Author) / Spohn, Cassia (Thesis advisor) / Fradella, Henry F. (Committee member) / Stolzenberg Roosevelt, Stacia (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
Do the circumstances of sexual assault situations shape how individuals view a victims’ blameworthiness and risk? To examine this, data were collected on college students' perceptions of a victims’ blameworthiness and a victims’ perceived amount of risk specifically looking at how these views differ across scenarios portraying varying rape myths. College students (n=395) from Arizona State University were recruited via professors to participate in the survey. In the analysis, chi-square tests were run and zero-inflated ordered probit logistic regressions (ZIOP) with clustered standard errors predicting risk and blame perceptions across scenarios were conducted. The results show that the college students’ perceptions of risk and victim blameworthiness did vary across the rape myths that were shown within the scenarios. The chi-square tests demonstrated that for all three of the risk and blame questions, respondents’ answers on the outcome were dependent on the scenario. The ZIOP demonstrated that overall, the respondents were unwilling to assign risk and blame to the victims in the scenarios, however, when they assigned risk and blame answers varied across the different scenarios. This indicates that the rape myths portrayed in each scenario changed how individuals rated a victim’s perceived blameworthiness and risk. This has implications for the continuation of exposure to sexual assault awareness training and courses.
ContributorsJones, Teairstayn Kaylynn Angel (Author) / Wallace, Danielle (Thesis advisor) / Fox-Talbot, Kathleen A (Committee member) / Montes, Andrea N (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022
Description
This study examined the effects of victim characteristics and past life experiences on attributions of blame to human trafficking victims in hypothetical scenarios. Specifically, this study investigates the main and interaction effects of the victim’s race, age, and victimization disclosure on outsider’s perceptions of blameworthiness. A factorial vignette survey that provided information about a victim altering her race (Black or White), current age (15 or 21), and availability of victimization disclosure was given to a university-based sample (N = 592). Utilizing three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the analysis, the results showed that the main effects of the victim’s age and victimization disclosure significantly influenced attributions of blame. The results also indicated that there are significant two-way and three-way interactions. The conclusion highlights the importance of these findings as well as avenues for future research and potential programming.
ContributorsPuckett, Audrey Lynn (Author) / Maguire, Edward (Thesis advisor) / Fox, Kate (Committee member) / Roe-Sepowitz, Dominique (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020