SAGE Journal Articles

Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Myers, D. L. (2003). Adult crime, adult time: Punishing violent youth in the adult criminal justice system. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 1(2), 173-197

Contemporary concerns about youth violence and related legislative reforms have resulted in greater numbers of adolescent offenders being handled in the adult criminal justice system. Although some past research suggests that juveniles transferred to adult court often receive somewhat lenient treatment, more recent studies focusing on violent youthful offenders have found the adult system to be more punitive in nature. This study examined this issue for 557 violent youth from Pennsylvania, of which 138 were judicially waived to adult court. Statistical analyses revealed that in terms of punishment certainty, severity, and swiftness, juveniles transferred to adult court were treated more harshly than were those retained in juvenile court, whereas juvenile court processing occurred much more quickly. Corresponding policy implications are discussed.

Questions that apply to this article:

  1. What sorts of statistics do the authors measure on juveniles in their research reported in the article?
  2. How do the author’s findings force us to reconsider the purposes and wisdom of a widespread approach to juvenile transfers to adult court?
  3. What have previous studies found in regards to juvenile transfer to adult court?

***

Miller, M. (1995). Covert participant observation: Reconsidering the least used method. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 11(2), 97-105.

Social scientists have virtually ignored the qualitative technique covert participant observation.

This variation of participant observation is either not mentioned or described in less than a page’s length U1 social science research methods texts. The majority of qualitative methods books provide a few illustrative examples. but scarcely more in terms of detailed instruction. Manifested m the selection of alternative field strategies, this disregard has made covert observation the truly least used of all the qualitative research methods. It is unfortunate that covert research is so rarely conducted because a veiled identity can enable the examination of certain remote and closed spheres of social life, particularly criminal and deviant ones, that simply cannot be inspected in an overt fashion. Consequently, covert research is well-suited for much subject maternal of concern to criminology and the criminal justice sciences. Also applicable 111 some situations where overt designs appear the appropriate or only opinion, covert schemes are infrequently considered. Clearly, complicated ethical issues inherent to secret investigations have created a methodological training bias that has suppressed their application. New generations of researchers therefore remain unfamiliar with a potentially valuable research option. This brief commentary reintroduces covert participant observation and presents the principal advantages of using the technique. Theoretical, methodological, and pragmatic grounds are offered for exercising covert research. Ethical matters long associated with the stifling of its use are also reconsidered in the context of criminal justice research. The ethicality of secret research, relative to other qualitative methods, is upheld for some research problems with certain stipulations.

Questions that apply to this article:

  1. What is covert participant observation in Criminal Justice?
  2. What are some of the pros and cons of this type of research?

***

Gibbs, J. P. (1998). Toward theories about criminal justice. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 4(1), 20-36

Theories about criminal justice are needed because of the important social policy implications of this area of study. There are three major questions which must be addressed by theorists as part of the study of criminal justice: (1) what are the aims of criminal justice agents? (2) what is the efficacy of criminal justice? (3) what are the consequences of criminal justice? Theories which have been proposed to answer these questions are reviewed and possible policy implications of these theories are explored.

Questions that apply to this article:

  1. What sorts of theories do the authors argue we should promote?
  2. What are the three major questions the author claims must be addressed by theorists as part of the study of criminal justice?
  3. What are some of the possible policy implications of the theories that the author explores?

***

Taylor, C. J. & Auerhahn, K. (2015). Community justice and public safety: Assessing criminal justice policy through the lens of the social contract. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 15(3), 300-320.

A reconceptualization of the idea of “community justice” is framed in the logic of the social contract and emphasizes the responsibility of the justice system for the provision of public safety. First, we illustrate the ways in which the criminal justice system has hindered the efforts of community residents to participate in the production of public safety by disrupting informal social networks. Then we turn to an examination of the compositional dynamics of California prison populations over time to demonstrate that the American justice system has failed to meet their obligations to provide public safety by incapacitating dangerous offenders. We argue that these policy failures represent a breach of the social contract and advocate for more effective collaboration between communities and the formal criminal justice system so that all parties can fulfill their obligations under the contract.

Questions that apply to this article:

  1. Discuss the elements of the social contract.
  2. What ethical concerns arise through the breaking of the social contract?