Travis W. Franklin

Predicting Fear of Crime Considering Differences Across Gender

The current research tests the vulnerability, disorder, and social integration models to determine their relative predictive capacity across separate female and male citizen samples on fear of crime. Although previous literature typically includes gender as a control variable, the present analysis goes beyond this to determine whether the models function differently according to gender. Findings indicate that there are in fact significant differences in predictors of female and male fear of crime. Increased age reduces fear for women but not men, and increased income leads to higher levels of fear for men but lower levels for women. Theoretical implications and future research directions are discussed.

Assessing the Effect of Routine Activity Theory and Self-Control on Property, Personal, and Sexual Assault Victimization:

This study used a sample of 2,230 female university students to assess the applicability of routine activity theory and self-control on property, personal, and sexual assault victimization. Results indicate that (a) both self-control deficits and participation in drug sale behavior were significantly correlated with increased property, personal, and sexual assault victimization; (b) increased partying and shopping frequency and off-campus housing significantly and substantively correlated with increased property victimization; (c) off-campus housing was correlated with increased personal victimization; and (d) increased number of days spent on campus and increased frequency of partying significantly increased sexual assault victimization, net of controls. Future directions for the integration of feminist theory and strategies for crime prevention are discussed.

Low Resting Heart Rate and Antisocial Behavior: A Brief Review of Evidence and Preliminary Results From a New Test

Despite a large body of research demonstrating a clear and consistent relationship between resting heart rate and antisocial behavior, little is understood about the relative influence on antisocial behavior of resting heart rate and other constructs central to criminological theories. Here, the authors offer an initial effort to bridge this gap in the literature by testing the relationship between resting heart rate and a measure of antisocial behavior net of attachment to parents, self-control, peer delinquency, and potential physiological confounds. Results from ANOVA show that those with low resting heart rates have significantly higher rates of severe antisocial behavior and aggressive antisocial behavior net of physiological confounds. Results from multivariate regression models show that low resting heart rate has a statistically significant relationship with severe antisocial behavior and aggressive behavior in models controlling for attachment to parents, self-control, peer delinquency, and physiological confounds.

Sentencing Asian Offenders in State Courts The Influence of a Prevalent Stereotype

A significant body of literature has developed to explain the controversial issue of sentencing disparity among various racial/ethnic groups. According to the focal concerns perspective, judges may rely on race-based stereotypes, among other factors, in reaching sentencing outcomes. This contention has received support by the empirical literature when examining sentencing differences that emerge between similarly situated White, Black, and Hispanic offenders. Unfortunately, very little research has addressed the relative treatment of Asian offenders to determine whether stereotypes that commonly target these individuals—particularly the “model minority” stereotype—emerge as a potential extralegal factor in judicial sentencing decisions. To address this shortcoming, the current study employs a large sample of offenders processed by state courts to examine the sentencing of Asians relative to White, Black, and Hispanic offenders. Findings are consistent with a focal concerns/model minority perspective and indicate that Asians are, in fact, treated more leniently than other racial/ethnic groups at the incarceration decision. This extralegal disparity, however, does not emerge during the sentence length decision. Implications for theory, policy, and future research are discussed.

Do DWI Courts Work? an Empirical Evaluation of a Texas DWI Court

Driving while intoxicated (DWI) courts have recently gained traction as a potential solution to the problem of repeat DWI offending. Unfortunately, there are only a handful of peer-reviewed studies that have examined their effectiveness. Thus, the current study compared DWI court graduates to a group of similar offenders who completed probation. Rearrest outcomes were examined at 6 and 12 months postrelease and survival analyses were conducted to determine whether DWI court treatment was able to delay rearrest. Results indicated that DWI court was no more effective than probation. These findings suggest that it is premature to endorse DWI courts for reducing DWI recidivism.

Sentencing Outcomes in U.S. District Courts: Can Offenders’ Educational Attainment Guard Against Prevalent Criminal Stereotypes?

Numerous studies have examined the influence of offender characteristics on sentencing outcomes, yet little attention has been afforded to offenders’ educational attainment. The focal concerns theory provides reason to suspect that greater educational attainment may insulate offenders from the effects of criminal stereotypes linked to extralegal factors, including race/ethnicity, age, and sex. The current analysis employs a sample of 115,674 federal offenders to test this assumption on the in/out and sentence length decisions. Results of the in/out models demonstrate a general pattern where the effects of several extralegal factors (i.e., race, ethnicity, age, sex, and detention) are reduced, and in some cases fully moderated, by offenders’ educational attainment. This pattern, however, is not apparent during the sentence length decision.

Extralegal Disparity in the Application of Intermediate Sanctions An Analysis of U.S. District Courts

The sentencing literature is replete with studies that have examined the influence of extralegal offender characteristics on two key sentence outcomes: the imprisonment and sentence length decisions. Yet the study of other outcomes, such as the application of intermediate sanctions, is rarely addressed. To date, no studies have been conducted in the federal courts to examine the potential influence of race/ethnicity, age, gender, and educational attainment on the decision to apply intermediate sanctions. Consequently, the present analysis employs U.S. Sentencing Commission data to examine direct and interactive effects of these extralegal characteristics on this understudied outcome. Findings indicate that extralegal effects may play an important role in the use of intermediate sanctions. The implications of this research are discussed in detail.

One Day Makes All the Difference: Denying Federal Offenders Access to “Good Time” Through Sentencing

The race/sentencing literature has focused on imprisonment and sentence length decisions to the exclusion of other relevant outcomes. The present study extends this research by examining a previously overlooked decision—that is, the decision to deny federal offenders access to “good time” through sentencing. The current study uses data from the United States Sentencing Commission (USSC; fiscal years [FYs] 2010-2012) to examine the potential influence of race and ethnicity on this previously unstudied outcome. Results indicate that relative to White offenders, Latino and Native American offenders are more likely to be denied good-time access, while Asian offenders are less likely to be denied access. African American offenders are treated no differently than White offenders. Implications for research and practice are discussed in detail.

Police Legitimacy in the Context of Street Stops: The Effects of Race, Class, and Procedural Justice:

Citizens’ perceptions of the police have been recognized as a long-standing issue of significant importance. Positive perceptions of the police, especially as they relate to legitimacy, are not only critical for fostering healthy police/community relationships but also for enhancing community safety. A large body of research has examined the predicates of legitimacy by studying residents’ general police perceptions as well as their perceptions in specific contexts, primarily traffic stops. Much less is known, however, about the sources of police legitimacy in the context of street stop encounters. Consequently, the current study uses data from the 2011 Police Public Contact Survey to examine the role of procedural justice, along with key sociodemographic characteristics—race and class—in shaping perceptions of legitimacy during non-traffic-related police–citizen street encounters. Findings indicate that officer behavior and levels of respect afforded to citizens during these encounters significantly influence perceptions of legitimacy. Implications and policy recommendations are discussed in detail.