Matching Items (35)
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
In this dissertation, I examine the treatment and sentencing of American Indian defendants. This work contributes to research on cumulative disadvantage and the role race and social context play to influence federal sentencing outcomes. Disparities in federal sentencing for racial and ethnic minorities are an important concern to scholars and policy makers. Literature suggests that blacks and Latinos are sentenced more harshly than similarly situated white offenders. These findings are concerning because they suggest that minorities are treated unfairly by the criminal justice system, questions the legitimacy of how offenders are processed and treated, and defendants of color who are meted out tougher punishments face substantial social and economic difficulties thereafter. Although the black-white and Latino-white disparities have been identified and highlighted, less is known about whether disparities extend to other minority groups, and consequently little is known about the treatment of these neglected groups.
I investigate whether American Indian defendants experience cumulative disadvantages at multiple decision points, disadvantage over time, and the effect of social context on drawing on American Indian disadvantage, the focal concerns and minority threat perspectives. The focal concerns perspective is used to develop hypotheses about how American Indian defendants will receive harsher punishments at multiple decision points. I also use this perspective to predict that American Indian disadvantages will increase over time. Lastly, I examine social context and its effect on punishment decisions for American Indians using the minority threat perspective. I hypothesize that social context impacts how American Indian defendants are sentenced at the federal level.
Data come from the Federal Justice Statistics Program Data Series, the US Census, and the Uniform Crime Report, with a focus on data gathered from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts and the United States Sentencing Commission. A range of modeling strategies are used to test the hypotheses including multinomial logistic regression, ordinary least squares regression, and multilevel modeling.
The results suggest that cumulative disadvantages against American Indian defendants is pronounced, American Indian disparity over time is significant for certain outcomes, and social context plays a limited role in American Indian sentencing disadvantage.
I investigate whether American Indian defendants experience cumulative disadvantages at multiple decision points, disadvantage over time, and the effect of social context on drawing on American Indian disadvantage, the focal concerns and minority threat perspectives. The focal concerns perspective is used to develop hypotheses about how American Indian defendants will receive harsher punishments at multiple decision points. I also use this perspective to predict that American Indian disadvantages will increase over time. Lastly, I examine social context and its effect on punishment decisions for American Indians using the minority threat perspective. I hypothesize that social context impacts how American Indian defendants are sentenced at the federal level.
Data come from the Federal Justice Statistics Program Data Series, the US Census, and the Uniform Crime Report, with a focus on data gathered from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts and the United States Sentencing Commission. A range of modeling strategies are used to test the hypotheses including multinomial logistic regression, ordinary least squares regression, and multilevel modeling.
The results suggest that cumulative disadvantages against American Indian defendants is pronounced, American Indian disparity over time is significant for certain outcomes, and social context plays a limited role in American Indian sentencing disadvantage.
ContributorsRedner-Vera, Erica N. (Author) / Wang, Xia (Thesis advisor) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / Wallace, Danielle (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
Prior sentencing research, especially research on cumulative disadvantage, has mainly focused on the treatment of male defendants, and little attention has been paid to female defendants, especially minority female defendants. Drawing on the intersectional vulnerability and focal concerns perspectives, the current study emphasizes the need to examine disparity in sentencing through an intersectional lens and across multiple decision-making points. Using the State Court Processing Statistics dataset (SCPS) from 1990-2009, this paper investigates the impact that race/ethnicity has for female defendants across individual and successive stages in the sentencing process. The results suggest that race operates through direct and indirect pathways to cause lengthier sentences for Black female defendants compared to White female defendants, thus providing evidence of cumulative disadvantage against Black female defendants. Theoretical, research, and policy implications will be discussed.
ContributorsKramer, Kelsey Layne (Author) / Wang, Xia (Thesis advisor) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / Telep, Cody (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
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
In recent decades, the United States has experienced a wave of immigration, an economic recession, and several terroristic attacks. In response, the government has scapegoated and blamed undocumented immigrants of color for recent social ills. As a result, a large share of government resources has been allocated to the enforcement and processing of immigration violations. Consequently, the number of immigration cases processed in U.S. federal courts has spiraled to nearly 50% of bookings and 34% of federal sentencing cases. Yet, immigration offenses have received little empirical attention in the courts and sentencing literature due in part to differences in the way immigration offenses are processed compared to other federal offense types, and relatedly, the empirical difficulties immigration offenses pose for analysis. Nevertheless, the increased representation of immigration offenses in federal courts, along with the punitive rhetoric and heightened social control targeting undocumented immigrants of color, warrants a comprehensive assessment of how immigration cases are processed in U.S. federal courts. Accordingly, this dissertation seeks to identify inequality in the processing of immigration cases by examining: 1) cumulative disadvantage within immigration cases; 2) contextual disparity and how social context interacts with ethnicity to influence multiple federal court outcomes within immigration cases; and 3) ethnic disparity within immigration cases over time.
Data come from the Federal Justice Statistics Program Data Series, the U.S. Census, the Uniform Crime Reports, Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections, the National Judicial Center, and the U.S. Department of Justice. The quantitative analysis addresses the first question by employing a cumulative disadvantage approach where multiple decision points are considered and the effects of prior stages on subsequent outcomes. The quantitative analysis proceeds to address the second question by using multilevel modeling for multiple court outcomes. The longitudinal analysis is separately conducted on sentence length for 18-year data, from 1994 through 2012, to assess racial and ethnic disparity over time.
The results indicate that cumulative disadvantage is present within immigration cases, that social context influences certain decision points, and that ethnic disparity has diminished over time in some districts.
Data come from the Federal Justice Statistics Program Data Series, the U.S. Census, the Uniform Crime Reports, Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections, the National Judicial Center, and the U.S. Department of Justice. The quantitative analysis addresses the first question by employing a cumulative disadvantage approach where multiple decision points are considered and the effects of prior stages on subsequent outcomes. The quantitative analysis proceeds to address the second question by using multilevel modeling for multiple court outcomes. The longitudinal analysis is separately conducted on sentence length for 18-year data, from 1994 through 2012, to assess racial and ethnic disparity over time.
The results indicate that cumulative disadvantage is present within immigration cases, that social context influences certain decision points, and that ethnic disparity has diminished over time in some districts.
ContributorsBeckman, Laura Owen (Author) / Wang, Xia (Thesis advisor) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / Zatz, Marjorie S. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
The #MeToo Movement has sparked debate across the world as to how prevalent sexual assault is and what can be done to help survivors. Although sexual assaults are the least likely crime to be reported to police, it is important to examine the criminal justice system’s treatment of these cases. The focus of this thesis is on the prosecution of sexual assault cases. Specifically, the goal is to uncover the factors that impact prosecutorial decision-making in sexual assault cases across three different timepoints. This study examines qualitative interviews conducted in 2010 with 30 Deputy District Attorneys from Los Angeles, California. Results reveal that prosecutors’ largely rely on their “gut feelings” about whether a case will be successful based on a combination of factors, including: victim credibility, availability of evidence, and corroboration of the victim’s story, just to name a few. The study concludes with an examination of these results, a discussion on the limitations of the study and a guide for future research, and what policy changes can come from these findings.
ContributorsHale, Julianna (Author) / Talbot, Kathleen (Thesis advisor) / Stolzenberg, Stacia (Committee member) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
For my honors thesis project in Barrett, the Honors College, I conducted an online college survey that measured student attitudes and perceptions with regard to gender, sexual assault, and domestic violence. In doing so, I also asked students situational questions about their experiences with sexual violence. The research question for the project centered around hidden victims who have been affected by gender-based violence but have yet to report the incident to law enforcement or university officials, despite a number of prominent educational and prevention campaigns on campus and in mainstream media. At the conclusion of the Spring 2016 semester, I received 683 responses from current students at Arizona State University. For the majority of situational questions, 20-30% of individuals answered "yes" to experiencing incidents of sexual violence, many of which focused on if someone had used alcohol/drugs, threats, or physical force to obtain sexual intercourse. For the survey, 11% of women said yes to the question, "have you ever been raped?" Additionally, a significant number of students hesitate to report incidents to law enforcement or university officials because: (1) they were ashamed or embarrassed, (2) wanted to forget it happened, and (3) believed it was a private matter that they wanted to deal with on their own. With this information, university administrators can develop a better understanding of the ASU campus culture as it relates to sexual violence. Additionally, organizational and institutional efforts can be organized and designed to meet the specific needs of our student body with the goal of ultimately reducing the number of sexual assaults that take place.
ContributorsBarney, Emily Marie (Author) / Wright, Kevin (Thesis director) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / School of Public Affairs (Contributor) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-12
Description
The most prominent theories for explaining the incidence and prevalence of misconduct in prison are deprivation (Clemmer, 1940; Sykes, 1958; Colvin, 1992), importation (Irwin and Cressey, 1962; Harer and Steffensmeier, 1996; Cao Zhao, and Van Dine, 1997), and administrative control (DiIulio, 1987; Useem and Kimball, 1989; Useem and Reisig, 1999). Administrative control does not supersede deprivation and importation theories, but rather adds to them by asserting quality management is essential for the maintenance of an orderly environment jeopardized by the effects of deprivation and importation. Even though research has supported administrative control, researchers have disagreed over which aspects of management are most effective for mitigating disorder, and have thus far only proven that poor management leads to administrative breakdowns in policies and practices that predicate disorder. This dissertation introduces the concept of positive administrative control, based on social exchange theory, as the mechanism prison administrators should use to induce staff to act in accordance with agency desires and avoid administrative breakdowns. The results show that when prison employees experience quality relationships with their supervisors, they are more likely engage with inmates in a similar fashion, which is associated with reductions in misconduct rates. At the same time, when prison employees are supported and rewarded for their good behavior, they are more likely to actively monitor inmates, which is associated with increases in misconduct rates. Additionally, the results support importation theory by demonstrating that the aggregated criminogenic characteristics of inmates in a prison are representative of cultural influences on prison misconduct.
Based on these findings, recommendations are made to restructure leadership training to emphasize relational leadership skills that positively influence staff to act in accordance with agency desires and more closely follow policy guidelines. It is also recommended that future studies consider including aggregated demographic variables in studies of misconduct in order to capture cultural/environmental influences that may otherwise be missed, and should avoid overuse of composite variables, in particular institution security level.
Based on these findings, recommendations are made to restructure leadership training to emphasize relational leadership skills that positively influence staff to act in accordance with agency desires and more closely follow policy guidelines. It is also recommended that future studies consider including aggregated demographic variables in studies of misconduct in order to capture cultural/environmental influences that may otherwise be missed, and should avoid overuse of composite variables, in particular institution security level.
ContributorsBenefiel, Rodger (Author) / Spohn, Cassia (Thesis advisor) / Hepburn, John R. (Committee member) / Griffin, Marie L. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
In the wake of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, courts and social service systems across the country have begun establishing veterans treatment courts (VTC). The first VTC was created in 2004 and there are now over 300 in at least 35 states. Yet, their underlying assumptions have not been clearly articulated and their functioning and outcomes have not been well tested. These courts aim to reduce rates of incarceration and recidivism among justice-involved veterans and draw heavily on the structure and assumptions of drug and mental health courts. However, VTCs are different in important ways. Unlike other problem solving courts, VTCs actively express gratitude to criminal defendants (for past military service) and have the ability to connect participants to a socially-esteemed identity. Earlier problem solving courts have drawn on Tyler’s theory of procedural justice to predict a path from procedurally fair treatment and social bonds with court personnel through changes in social identity to increased perceptions of legal legitimacy and, ultimately, program completion and reduced recidivism. The present study tested a modified, version of Tyler’s theory that incorporates gratitude and focuses on veteran identity as the mediating construct between fair treatment and perceptions of legal legitimacy. A cross-sectional survey design was used with a convenience sample (N = 188) of participants in two Arizona VTCs. The results indicate that perceptions of procedural justice, perceived social bonds and receipt of gratitude are positively associated with both veteran identity and perceptions of legal legitimacy. Further, veteran identity was found to be a significant mediator between the first three constructs and legal legitimacy. Finally, neither recidivism risk nor race/ethnicity moderated the relationships. The study supports the importance of acknowledging past military service and enhancing the level of veteran identity among VTC participants. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.
ContributorsGallagher, John M (Author) / Ashford, José B. (Thesis advisor) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / Shafer, Michael S (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
Description
Following a sexual assault, victims are advised to have a medical forensic exam and undergo a sexual assault kit (SAK) collection. The SAK is then held in police storage until it undergoes testing at a crime lab. Unfortunately, tens of thousands of SAKs in the United States remain untested. This thesis examines SAK submission by organizational decision makers in sexual assault case processing. Guided by Black's theory of law, this paper seeks to examine if white and minority victims systematically experience differential access to justice in terms of getting their respective SAKs submitted. Using data from a 1982-2012 Sexual Assault Kit Backlog Study in Los Angeles, California, the current study explores the relationship between race and SAK submission, legal (eg., case specific) and extralegal (eg., victim characteristics) variables across 1,826 backlogged SAKs and 339 non-backlogged SAKs. Results from the logistic regression analysis indicate that victims of nonstranger sexual assault are more likely to experience backlog of their SAK while victim race does not appear to affect SAK submission. Implications for theory, research and criminal justice practice are discussed.
ContributorsYlang, Norah (Author) / Holtfreter, Kristy (Thesis advisor) / Telep, Cody W. (Committee member) / Spohn, Cassia (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016