Search

The racial gradient hypothesis of comparative conflict theory predicts Black people perceive the greatest social injustices, followed by Latinx and white people, respectively. This study used nationally representative data collected prior to George Zimmerman's arrest to examine whether racial groups (Black, Latinx, white) differed in their perceptions that Zimmerman was guilty of a crime against Trayvon Martin. Logistic regression results revealed Black participants were 98% more likely than white participants to perceive Zimmerman as guilty. Latinx perceptions of Zimmerman's guilt did not significantly differ from those of Black or white participants. Findings suggest some Latinx individuals may not fully appreciate how the same U.S. racial hierarchy that harms Latinx communities also works to produce anti-Black violence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study used telephone surveys from 350 randomly sampled Philadelphians to examine whether attributing crime to individual and environmental causes predicted support for punitive and progressive policies, respectively. This study also investigated whether Blacks and Whites differed in their preferred crime responses, and whether race interacted with crime attributions to predict preferred policies. Finally, this study explored whether biological attributions predicted support for policies. Linear regression analyses revealed: (1) individual crime attributions predicted support for punitive response policies; (2) environmental crime attributions predicted support for progressive policies; (3) Blacks more strongly supported progressive policies; (4) race significantly interacted with crime attributions to predict support for progressive policies; and (5) attributing crime to biological causes was unrelated to either policy type. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the mid‐1970s, the percentage of non‐White people convicted of white‐collar type crimes in the federal judicial system has been growing steadily. In 2015, non‐Whites accounted for more than half of all convictions for certain white‐collar type crimes, but the increase in non‐White participation has not occurred evenly across all race and ethnic groups. Asians and Latinos have increased their participation in white‐collar crime more so than Blacks. Using data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the U.S. Census, we investigate whether the differential increase among race and ethnic groups in white‐collar type crimes can be explained by their differential increase in middle‐class occupations. The findings have implications for opportunity, cultural, and race‐centered perspectives on crime, as well as institutional anomie theory, and they suggest that low‐level white‐collar crimes are being democratized along lines of race and ethnicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ever since the highly publicized Texas case in which a wealthy, Caucasian teenager invoked ‘affluenza’ as a mitigating factor during his homicide trial, public discourse has debated the appropriateness of considering wealth during criminal sentences. Underlying this debate is a question about race: would a black defendant have the same chance of successfully using the affluenza defense? Intersectionality suggests that considerations of class, as implicated by the affluenza debate, are necessarily conditioned by understandings of race. This research examines whether public opinion supports the idea that extreme wealth contributes to criminal offending; whether affluence should be considered during sentencing; and whether a black defendant would able to use the affluenza defense successfully. Examining public opinion data from a statewide poll in Pennsylvania, this research explores public opinion on affluenza and examines whether race and other demographic characteristics influence the attribution process. The researchers use multivariate models to investigate significant predictors tied to respondents’ opinions, and they make observations about the impact of these factors on due process in sentencing procedures. This research provides an important first step in exploring whether the public perceives affluenza to be related to offending, related punitiveness, and the interplay of race with that attribution process. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Using open-ended survey questions, this study looks to expand on prior race and crime public opinion research by examining Philadelphia area residents' views as to why they believed Blacks and Hispanics are overrepresented in the criminal justice system. The results reveal that Philadelphia citizens do have distinct opinions, in that a majority of participants discussed several contributing factors. Respondents believed that family influences, economic reasons, and lack of education were top contributing factors to both Black and Hispanic disproportionality. Generally speaking, similarities were found in individual participants' responses to both Black and Hispanic disproportionality questions, with a few notable exceptions. White respondents were significantly more likely to believe that economic factors contribute to the overrepresentation of Blacks in the criminal justice system. Finally, participants' answers to the Black and Hispanic questions did not differ based on the race of the respondent. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

As an anomaly of extant literature that maintains Blacks as a collective are less supportive of racial profiling than other ethnic groups, this article explores the backgrounds of Blacks who support the practice of racial profiling (referred to as Black Supporters). This study analyzed a national Gallup poll that included measures on profiling and had a significant number of Black respondents (N = 534). Black Supporters tended to be female; live in the Southern United States; and be politically conservative. Although multivariate analyses revealed few differences between Black Supporters and nonsupporters, the study represents an earnest attempt to explore Black support for a policing strategy that has both historically and contemporarily had negative effects on Black communities. We conclude the article by discussing the benefits of studying Black Supporters. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article examined the role of race/ethnicity on the perceptions of safety among a diverse sample of Americans. Using a recent Gallup poll, it was revealed that Blacks and Hispanics were less likely than Whites to be satisfied with their safety from harm and violence. The multivariate analyses also found that more educated individuals and those with higher incomes were more likely to be satisfied with their level of safety. Other significant factors included political ideology, church attendance, and region. Split sample logistic regression models found additional significant differences by race/ ethnicity. The implications of the research also are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the generality of citizens' views concerning racial profiling across several contexts. More specifically, the research investigated whether citizens' perceptions regarding the widespread nature of racial profiling and their belief whether this profiling is justified converged when considering the practice in diverse settings, such as during traffic stops, in retail establishments, and at airports. Using data from a nationally representative poll with an oversample of Blacks and Hispanics, the results of the structural equation model analysis supported the supposition that perceptions regarding racial profiling across contexts form one latent construct. The perceptions of airport, traffic stop, and consumer racial profiling—in the context of widespread nature and justification—form two general latent measures. These perceptions differ based on race, age, sex, and income. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]