Juvenile Justice Decision-Making as a Longitudinal Process

Thornberry, Terence P.; Christenson, R. L.

doi:10.1093/sf/63.2.433

Cited by 29 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Judges are unlikely to gain substantial idiosyncratic knowledge about each individual and situation that appears before them in court, and must rely on culturally constructed stereotypes, past experiences, social attitudes, and motivations to supplement rational-legal factors in sentencing decisions (Albonetti, 1987; Bridges & Steen, 1998). Empirical evidence supports the contention that extralegal factors like race, gender, and social class contribute to processing outcomes even when legal factors are considered (Bishop, 2005; Bishop & Frazier, 1996; Bortner, Sunderland, & Winn, 1985; Bray, Sample, & Kempf-Leonard, 2005; Conley, 1994; Frazier & Bishop, 1995; Guevara, Spohn, & Herz, 2004; Leiber, 1994; Thornberry & Christensen, 1984; Wordes & Bynum, 1995; Wordes, Bynum, & Corley, 1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Gender and Status Offending

Spivak

Wagner

Whitmer

et al. 2014

Feminist Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the relationship between gender and juvenile justice processing outcomes for status offenders. The feminist criminological concept of judicial paternalism suggests that official justice systems, as gendered institutions with traditional patriarchal norms, will treat delinquent girls differently than delinquent boys. This paternalistic effect should be especially prevalent for status offenses, which are used to enforce institutional (parental, school, civic, parochial) authority. Using 1999-2001 juvenile processing data for 3,329 status offense referrals to the Oklahoma Office of Juvenile Affairs (N = 3,329) and controlling for age, race, prior history, type of status offense, and measures of social class and urban environment, our results indicate that (a) girls outnumber boys among status offenders, (b) girls are more likely than boys to have their petitions filed for review, (c) girls are less likely than boys to be adjudicated guilty, and (d) girls are just as likely as boys to receive an incarcerated custody sentence as opposed to probation. We argue that these results illustrate the manifestation of the juvenile justice system as a gendered institution in which the adjudication of status offenders reflects judicial paternalism.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Gender and Status Offending

Spivak

Wagner

Whitmer

et al. 2014

Feminist Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, critics note that the crime-unemployment relationship is based on a microtheoretical foundation that assumes subjective feelings, whereas most evidence is based on aggregate-level data that cannot provide insights into individual behavior (Long and Witte, 1981; Orsagh and Witte, 1981). The limited individual-level research reveals that unemployment does have some effect on crime, but it has focused almost exclusively on objective information concerning employment status and history (Bachman et al, 1978;Crowley, 1984;Farrington et al, 1986; Hartnagel, 1990; Hartnagel and Krahn, 1989;Samuelson, 1988; Shavit and Rattner, 1988; Thornberry and Christenson, 1984; Thornberry and Farnworth, 1982).…”

Section: Theoretical Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attributions, Affect, and Crime: Street Youths' Reactions to Unemployment*

Baron

Hartnagel

1997

Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research examines the role familial, school, labor market, and street factors play in the criminality of 200 homeless male street youths. Of particular interest is the way these youths interpret their labor market experiences and how together these experiences and interpretations influence criminal behavior. Findings reveal that familial and school factors have minimal influence on current criminal behavior. Instead, criminal behavior is influenced by such immediate factors as homelessness, drug and alcohol use, and criminal peers who engage in illegal activities. Further, criminal behavior is influenced by a lack of income, job experiences, and perceptions of a blocked opportunity structure. While labor market conditions and reactions to those conditions have some effect on crime, the findings also suggest that lengthy unemployment, job experiences, and a lack of income work in tandem with anger and external attributions to increase street youths' criminal activities.Advanced capitalist societies are undergoing structural transformations in their economies and labor markets that produce growth in nonstandard employment (including part-time, part-year, and temporary work) and an increasingly segmented labor market with many poor-paying jobs in a lower tier service sector (Hartnagel

show abstract

“…In other studies, however, extralegal factors (such as race or ethnicity) continue to have an influence even when legal factors are included (Armstrong & Rodriguez, ; Bishop, 1995; Bishop, ; Bishop & Frazier, ; Bishop, Leiber, & Johnson, ; Bortner, Sunderland & Winn, ; Conley, ; Frazier & Guevara, et al., ; Guevara, et al. ; Thornberry & Christensen, ; Wordes, Bynum, & Conley, ; Wordes and Bynum, ). Some studies have revealed that minority youth were more likely to be taken into custody by the police than White youth (Black & Reiss, ; Conley, ; Dannefer & Schutt, ; Piliavin & Briar, ; Thornberry, ; Wordes & Bynum, ) and that minority youth were more likely than White youth to be detained following arrest and to be formally petitioned to juvenile court (Bortner, Sunderland & Winn, ; DeJong & Jackson, ; Frazier & Bishop, ; Johnson & Secret, ; Kempf‐Leonard & Sontheimer, ; McGarrell, ; Thomas & Sieverdes, ; Wordes, Bynum & Corley, ).…”

Section: Previous Research On Racial Disparities In Juvenile Court Oumentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The results from multi‐stage studies indicate four ways that race affects juvenile court outcomes. First, some studies revealed a direct effect of race on outcomes, even when controlling for other factors (Bishop & Frazier, ; Conley, ; Frazier & Bishop, ; Thornberry & Christensen, ; Wordes, Bynum, & Conley, ; Bortner, Sunderland & Winn, ; Wordes & Bynum, ). Second, some studies concluded that the effect of race was indirect rather than direct, meaning differences in outcomes may be attributed to policies and practices that have differential effects on racial groups.…”

Section: Previous Research On Racial Disparities In Juvenile Court Oumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The inconsistent findings in earlier research are largely credited to the examination of one stage of decision‐making or the comparison of findings from different stages of decision‐making. Some studies have analyzed the police decision to arrest or release the youth (Bell & Lang, ; Black and Reiss, ; Piliavin & Briar, ; Thomas & Sieverdes, ), while other studies have examined the decision to detain a youth after arrest, and yet other studies have evaluated the disposition decision (Bailey, ; Cohen & Klugel, 1979a; Frazier & Cochran, ; Hawkins ; Holman & Ziedenberg, ; Leiber & Fox, ; Marshall & Thomas, ; Phillipi, ; Thornberry & Christensen, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

When Does Race Matter in Juvenile Court Outcomes? A Test of the “Type of Offense” Hypothesis

Guevara¹,

Shekarkhar²,

Fuller³

2018

Juvenile Family Court J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study examined the influence of race on juvenile court outcomes across various offense types. This study builds on previous research in the field by utilizing the symbolic threat perspective as a foundation for understanding differences in juvenile disposition. It is hypothesized that the influence of race varies across offense types (misdemeanors and felonies) for the pre‐detention and disposition outcomes. Data from a sample of juvenile court referrals from two Midwestern juvenile courts were utilized and partitioned by race. Results were mixed and not always in the hypothesized direction. However, the results indicated that race did have an influence on both pre and post adjudication juvenile court outcomes, an effect which varied by type of offense and race. This study illustrates the importance of examining juvenile court outcomes from a multi‐stage approach that includes legal and extra‐legal factors.

show abstract

Juvenile Justice Decision-Making as a Longitudinal Process

Cited by 29 publications

References 11 publications

Gender and Status Offending

Gender and Status Offending

Attributions, Affect, and Crime: Street Youths' Reactions to Unemployment*

When Does Race Matter in Juvenile Court Outcomes? A Test of the “Type of Offense” Hypothesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About