Michael J. Leiber

The Individual And Joint Effects Of Race, Gender, And Family Status On Juvenile Justice Decision-Making

Relying on interpretations of the symbolic threat thesis as a theoretical framework, in particular the emphasis on the perceptions of decision-makers and stereotyping, the authors examine the extent to which the effects of race on youth justice outcomes are influenced by gender and family status. They are especially interested in the individual and joint effects among the three. Although some studies in the adult literature have examined these variables, research on the influence of race, gender, and family status on juvenile justice decision-making is lacking. The inquiry is on four juvenile court jurisdictions in Iowa. The results from logistic regressions indicate that being African American affects justice outcomes, outcomes for Whites are conditioned by gender and family status, and decision-making should be viewed as a process involving both severe and lenient outcomes.

Race and the Impact of Detention on Juvenile Justice Decision Making

In recent years, the growing number of minority youth disproportionately confined in secure detention facilities has led to a search for a better understanding of this occurrence. Explanations vary but tend to center on either differential offending or selection bias. The present study examines the extent both may explain decision making by specifically assessing the effect of race on detention and the degree that race and detention influence further court processing in one juvenile court jurisdiction in the state of Iowa. Multivariate analyses using juvenile court data (1980 through 2000) show that although legal factors account for some of the decision making and minority over representation, so too does race. Evidence is presented that, through detention, race has direct, interaction, and indirect effects that often work to the disadvantage of African American youth relative to White youth. Implications for future research and policy are discussed.

Being Young and Black: What Are Their Effects on Juvenile Justice Decision Making?

This study examined the extent to which race and age individually and jointly determined juvenile justice case outcomes at intake and judicial disposition among males in one county juvenile court in the state of Iowa. Using an interpretation of the symbolic threat thesis and the emphasis on stereotyping as the theoretical framework, we discovered that being Black and older increased a youths chances of receiving an intake court referral and decreased the odds of participation in intake diversion. Age did not condition intake decision making for African Americans but was discovered to temper case outcomes for Whites. Although individual relationships were found, there was no evidence of joint race-age effects in decision making at judicial disposition.

Assessing the Violent Offending and Violent Victimization Overlap Among Discharged Psychiatric Patients

Prior studies have documented linkages between mental disorder and both offending and victimization. However, few studies have examined the violent offending–violent victimization overlap among mentally disordered individuals and none have examined the factors that are jointly related to their covariation. Here, we assess this overlap during the first ten weeks following hospital discharge among a large sample of psychiatric patients from three large cities. Findings indicate that: (1) violent offending and violent victimization show substantial covariation; (2) although each of the two outcomes were predicted by a few unique risk factors, several risk factors were similarly predictive of both outcomes; and (3) even after adjusting for demographic, clinical, and social risk factors, the correlation between violent offending and violent victimization remained robust. Implications for theory, research, and policy are highlighted.

A comparison of juvenile court outcomes for Native Americans, African Americans, and whites

Referrals to a district juvenile court in Iowa were examined for 1980 through 1989 to test an interpretation of Webers theory of decision making and formal rationality. Logistic regression was employed to examine two hypotheses: 1) Native American youths and African American youths receive more severe outcomes than white youths with similar backgrounds and legal histories, and 2) Native Americans are at a greater disadvantage in general than African Americans. The findings show that youths of both minority groups receive different treatment from white youths. Although the race effects varied with the stage assessed in the proceedings, it was found that Native American youths were more likely to receive less severe outcomes than African American youths. Interviews with juvenile court decision makers were used to help explain the observed patterns.

Race, Contexts, and the Use of Intake Diversion

A modified version of Sampson and Laubs integrative conflict perspective, which emphasizes structural contingencies, racial stereotyping, and punitiveness, is used to understand the influence of race on diversionary decision making at intake in three juvenile courts in the state of Iowa. The authors hypothesized that in a jurisdiction that has greater economic and racial inequality and personnel that adhere to beliefs in racial differences and retribution, African Americans, particularly those charged with drug offenses, would receive greater social control than similarly situated whites. The results provide partial support for the hypothesis. The discussion focuses on the need to broaden the scope of the search for the contingencies of decision making, to employ multiple research methodologies, and to refine conflict theory to account for the differential treatment of African American youth.

Race and decision making within juvenile justice: The importance of context

Previous tests of the influence of race on decision making within juvenile justice proceedings have traditionally focused on case-level variables and/or macrolevel factors that characterize the jurisdictions under study. Often excluded are measures of the attitudinal context within which decision making occurs. Using a revised conflict perspective that incorporates the role of racial stereotyping, hypotheses are developed centering on racial differences in case processing decisions within four midwest jurisdictions. Attitudes of juvenile court officials toward the punitiveness of the juvenile court and perceptions regarding differences between the behavior and attitudes of whites and those of African Americans are included in additive and race interactive models of five decision-making stages. Results indicate both lenient and harsh treatment of African Americans compared to whites. Hypotheses regarding racial stereotyping in the decision-making process receive some support and the discussion focuses on how inconsistent racial effects may be a function of variation in structural “coupling” across system decision points.

Contexts of Decision Making in the Juvenile Justice System: An Organizational Approach to Understanding Minority Overrepresentation

Significant advances have been made in our understanding of the origins and dynamics of minority overrepresentation in the juvenile justice system. Nevertheless, much remains to be learned. In this article, the authors explore the impact of race on juvenile justice processing by examining the organizational contexts in which decisions are made. They offer a theoretical framework that combines insights from organizational theory and the focal concerns perspective and that focuses on the organizational players (action sets) involved in decision making from intake to final disposition. Based on the composition of action sets, and their corresponding value orientations, the authors make predictions regarding the influence of sociodemographic, legal, and extralegal variables at each processing juncture. The empirical test provides a reasonably good fit with the data. Implications for further research are discussed.

Determinants of police growth in Phoenix, 1950–1988

Many explanations (e.g., rising crime) have been advanced for understanding the nature of police growth. Most often cross-sectional analyses have been employed to test the validity of these perspectives. Only three studies have examined police growth using an individual city and longitudinal data. Two of these studies focused on Chicago, the third on Detroit. This research examines the determinants of police growth in Phoenix, Arizona from 1950 through 1988. The primary objective is to test three competing theories of police growth: public choice, conflict, and organizational constraints. We employed ordinary least square (OLS) procedures to assess the determinants of two forms of police growth: police officers per 1,000 population and police expenditures per 100,000 population. Overall the findings support all three perspectives, though we derived the strongest and most consistent explanations from the conflict and organizational constraints perspectives.

Family Structure, Family Processes, Economic Factors, and Delinquency: Similarities and Differences by Race and Ethnicity

Using data from the Add Health Study, the authors examined relationships among family structure, family processes, and economic factors with delinquency and to what extent similarities and differences may exist for Whites, African Americans, and Hispanics. Results from negative binomial regression analyses indicated that, in general, of the family processes, maternal attachment was consistently found to be an important predictor of nonserious and serious delinquency irrespective of family structure, economic factors, and race and ethnicity. The results are discussed within the context of Hirschis original interpretation of social control theory, and future directions for research are suggested.