Margaret C. Stevenson

Knowledge of Juvenile Sex Offender Registration Laws Predicts Adolescent Sexual Behavior

Because juveniles can now be registered as sex offenders, we conducted a pilot study to investigate awareness of these policies and sexual behavior histories in a convenience sample of 53 young adults (ages 18 to 23, 79% women). These preliminary data revealed that 42% percent of participants were unaware that youth under the age of 18 can be registered as sex offenders, and when informed that they can be, participants were unaware of the breadth of adolescent sexual behavior that warrants registration. Furthermore, those unaware of juvenile registration policies, compared to those who were aware, were marginally more likely to have had sex prior to age 18. Thus, youth most at risk of registration were least aware of this possibility, suggesting that juvenile registration likely does little to deter many behaviors that are considered to be juvenile sex offenses.

Effects of Defendant and Victim Race on Perceptions of Juvenile Sex Offenders

We investigated effects of defendant race, victim race, and juror gender on public perceptions of a juvenile sex offense. We predicted that participants, particularly men, would support registering a juvenile defendant as a sex offender more when he was Black than White and that participants, particularly women, would support registering the defendant more when the female crime victim was portrayed as White than as Black. We also expected that support for registration would be higher when the defendant and victim were different races than when they were the same race. As expected, women (but not men) recommended registration more when the victim was White than Black. Further, participants supported registration more when the defendant and the victim were different races than when they were the same race. These effects were mediated by retributive goals to punish the offender-not by utilitarian goals to protect society. Explanations and implications are discussed.

Predictors of Support for Juvenile Sex Offender Registration: Educated Individuals Recognize the Flaws of Juvenile Registration.

We investigated demographic predictors of support for juvenile sex offender registration policies, including education level, gender, political orientation, and age. Participants were 168 individuals recruited from public places in a Midwest community (45% women; M age = 42). In line with hypotheses, as education level increased, support for juvenile registration decreased, as did the belief that juvenile registration protects the community. In addition, as education level increased, belief that the juvenile understood his actions decreased, as did support for juvenile registration when it is framed as ineffective at reducing sex crime. These beliefs mediated the relationship between education level and diminished support for juvenile registration. Implications of these results for the advancement of effective juvenile sex offender policy are discussed.

Perceptions of Juvenile Offenders Who Were Abused as Children

Should a history of child abuse be taken into consideration when a juvenile offender is punished? Although some research shows that child abuse is used as a mitigating factor for juvenile offenders (i.e., elicits less punitive sentences), surveys of juvenile court officials reveal that it is considered an aggravating factor. Specifically, in controlled mock jury studies in which child abuse is experimentally manipulated, child abuse elicits less punitive sentences. In contrast, child abuse elicits more punitive sentences in a nonexperimentally controlled environment—the juvenile justice system. This article provides a comprehensive literature review to explain these conflicting bodies of research by considering factors that naturally covary with childhood abuse: chaotic family environment, mental health problems, behavioral problems, and school problems.

9 Public Attitudes Toward Applying Sex Offender Registration Laws to Juvenile Offenders

J.M. Lampinen, K. Sexton-Radek, Protecting Children from Violence: Historical Roots and Emerging Trends. J. Galezewski, Exposure to Violence: Who is Most Effected and Why? L. Abrams, S.G. Portwood, Protecting Children in Their Homes: Effective Prevention Programs and Policies. K. Sexton-Radek, Empirically-based Violence Prevention Interventions. R.A. Newgent, A.D. Seay, K.T. Malcolm, E.A. Keller, T.A. Cavell, Identifying Children Potentially At-risk for Serious Maladjustment Due to Peer Victimization: A New Model Using Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) Analysis. T.N. Odegard, C.M. Cooper, R.E. Holliday, S.J. Ceci, Interviewing Child Victims: Advances in the Scientific Understanding of Child Eyewitness Memory. J.M. Lampinen, J.D. Arnal, A. Culbertson-Faegre, L. Sweeney, Missing and Abducted Children. C.S. Peters, R.W. Kowalski, L.A. Malesky, Jr., Looking Both Ways Before Crossing the Information Superhighway: Issues of Concern for Minors in Cyberspace. J.M. Salerno, M.C. Stevenson, T.R.A. Wiley, C.J. Najdowski, B.L. Bottoms, R.A. Schmillen, Public Attitudes Toward Applying Sex Offender Registration Laws to Juvenile Offenders. P.A. Petretic, E. White Chaisson, Mediating Factors in the Long-Term Outcome Following Childhood Abuse: Cognitive and Other Factors Predicting Personal Distress, Intimacy Functioning and Resilience. R. Schleser, M.E. Bodzy, Cognitive Development and Exposure to Violence in Children. J. Hahn-Holbrook, C. Holbrook, J. Bering, Snakes, Spiders, Strangers: How the Evolved Fear of Strangers May Misdirect Efforts to Protect Children from Harm. P.T. McWhirter, E. Altshuler-Bard, International Perspectives on Domestic Violence. C.E. Stout, Protecting Children from the Violence of Global Health Inequities: Working Beyond Academic Halls and Clinic Walls. K. Sexton-Radek, J.M. Lampinen, Protecting Children from Violence: Historical Roots and Emerging Trends: Conclusions.

Economically disadvantaged juvenile offenders tried in adult court are perceived as less able to understand their actions, but more guilty

We investigated the influence of a juvenile defendants socioeconomic status (SES) on mock jurors’ perceptions of a juvenile tried in adult court. As predicted, participants convicted the low SES juvenile defendant of felony murder significantly more than the middle or high SES juvenile defendant. Yet, participants also rated the low SES juvenile as less mature than the middle or high SES juvenile – a belief that past research shows predicts leniency in verdicts (i.e., not guilty judgments). Finally, stereotypes about the criminality of low SES juvenile defendants, not a lack of perceived similarity, partially mediated the effect of SES on guilt.

Racially diverse juries promote self-monitoring efforts during jury deliberation.

Interracial interactions produce anxiety among dominant group members, due to a fear of behaving prejudicially (e.g., Plant, 2004). In turn, anxiety promotes self-monitoring strategies during interracial interactions, reflecting attempts to avoid expressions of prejudice (e.g., Monteith, 1993). In the present research, we investigated the effects of jury racial composition (all White vs. racially mixed) on mock jury deliberations, expecting that interracial juries will trigger social anxiety, self-monitoring, and in turn, diminished communication with fellow jurors (i.e., word count). Testing these hypotheses, mock jurors’ online text responses ostensibly explaining their verdict preference to either a racially diverse or all-White jury were subjected to text analysis via Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (LIWC) software. Supporting hypotheses, mock jurors spoke significantly less (used fewer words), yet simultaneously spent more time developing their response in racially mixed juries than all-White juries. The effect of jury racial composition on word count was serially mediated by fewer social words, and in turn, greater use of first-person singular pronouns in racially diverse juries, likely reflecting increased social anxiety and self-monitoring efforts in interracial contexts.

Rape perpetrator gender shapes liability judgments: Implications for disgust and moral outrage.

We explored the impact of defendant and plaintiff gender in a sexual assault civil trial as well as the possible mediating role of emotion (i.e., disgust and moral outrage) on liability outcomes. Participants were 229 community members (61% women; M age = 36) who read a civil trial depicting an alleged prison rape in which an inmate was allegedly sexually assaulted by a prison guard. Plaintiff and defendant gender were manipulated in a fully crossed between-subjects design, resulting in 4 conditions. Specifically, participants read about either a male or female plaintiff (i.e., Mr./Ms. Roberson) and about either a male or female defendant (i.e., Mr./Ms. Shaw). Participants subsequently rendered liability outcomes and completed a series of case judgments (i.e., perceived disgust toward the defendant, moral outrage toward the defendant, and the belief that the crime is common). A series of path analyses supported our theoretically derived hypotheses regarding defendant gender. Participants were more disgusted by a male versus female defendant, which, in turn, predicted greater moral outrage toward the male defendant, which, in turn, predicted defendant liability. Although there were fewer effects or interactions involving plaintiff gender, participants were more morally outraged and more likely to believe the crime was common when the plaintiff was female than male. Finally, when the defendant was female, participants were less likely to believe the crime was common when the plaintiff was male than female.

The influence of a juvenile's abuse history on support for sex offender registration

We investigated whether and how a juvenile’s history of experiencing sexual abuse affects public perceptions of juvenile sex offenders in a series of 5 studies. When asked about juvenile sex offenders in an abstract manner (Studies 1 and 2), the more participants (community members and undergraduates) believed that a history of being sexually abused as a child causes later sexually abusive behavior, the less likely they were to support sex offender registration for juveniles. Yet when participants considered specific sexual offenses, a juvenile’s history of sexual abuse was not considered to be a mitigating factor. This was true when participants considered a severe sexual offense (forced rape; Study 3 and Study 4) and a case involving less severe sexual offenses (i.e., statutory rape), when a juvenile’s history of sexual abuse backfired and was used as an aggravating factor, increasing support for registering the offender (Study 3 and Study 5). Theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed.

Ambivalent Sexism in Context: Hostile and Benevolent Sexism Moderate Bias Against Female Drivers

We investigated whether ambivalent sexism predicts bias against female drivers in a simulated civil trial paradigm. Participants were randomly assigned to read a vignette of an automobile accident involving a male or female defendant. In a driving context designed to incite feelings of competitiveness toward women (Study 1), hostile sexism predicted greater responsibility attributed to the female defendant. In a context designed to elicit paternalistic attitudes toward women (Study 2), benevolent sexism predicted increased responsibility attributed to the female defendant. Findings show that hostile and benevolent sexism predict different patterns of discriminatory treatment depending on contextually triggered concepts of women.