SAGE Journal Articles
Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.
Journal Article 1: Link, N. W., Kelly, J. M., Pitts, J. R., Waltman-Spreha, K., & Taylor, R. B. (2014). Reversing broken windows: Evidence of lagged, multilevel impacts of risk perceptions on perceptions of incivility. Crime and Delinquency, 63, 659–682.
Abstract: Despite a large number of studies testing Broken Windows Theory (BWT), the reverse theoretical pathway has never been assessed longitudinally (risk perceptions → incivilities perceptions). It is estimated here using panel data from Baltimore, Maryland. Results show lagged, multilevel impacts of risk perceptions on shifting incivilities perceptions. Furthermore, impacts of risk perceptions on later shifts in perceived incivilities vary significantly across street blocks. Findings support Harcourt’s assertion that “disorder” is not a fixed and unambiguous label; rather, it is dependent on a person defining his or her surroundings. People who report a high degree of crime risk are “biased” toward defining neighborhood features as more problematic than those who do not.
Journal Article 2: Cullen, F. T., Gendreau, P., Jarjoura, G. R., & Wright, J. P. (1997). Crime and the Bell Curve: Lessons from intelligent criminology. Crime and Delinquency, 43, 387–411.
Abstract: In their best-selling book, The Bell Curve, Herrnstein and Murray argue that IQ is a powerful predictor of a range of social ills including crime. They use this “scientific reality” to oppose social welfare policies and, in particular, to justify the punishment of offenders. By reanalyzing the data used in The Bell Curve and by reviewing existing meta-analyses assessing the relative importance of criminogenic risk factors, the present authors show empirically that Herrnstein and Murray's claims regarding IQ and crime are misleading. The authors conclude that Herrnstein and Murray's crime control agenda is based on ideology, not on intelligent criminology.
Journal Article 3: Crandall, C. S., Miller, J. M., & White, M. H., II. (2018). Changing norms following the 2016 U.S. presidential election: The Trump effect on prejudice. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9, 186–192.
Abstract: The 2016 presidential election was characterized by the remarkable expression of prejudice toward a range of groups. In two closely related studies (N = 388; 196 supporting Trump, 192 Clinton), we measured (1) perceptions of social norms toward prejudice or (2) people’s own levels of prejudice toward 19 social groups, shortly before and after the election. Some groups were targeted by the Trump campaign (e.g., Muslims, immigrants) and some were not (e.g., atheists, alcoholics). Participants saw an increase in the acceptability of prejudice toward groups Trump targeted but little shift in untargeted groups. By contrast, participants reported a personal drop in Trump-targeted prejudice, probably due changing comparison standards, with no change in prejudice toward untargeted groups. The 2016 election seems to have ushered in a normative climate that favored expression of several prejudices; this shift may have played a role in the substantial increase in bias-related incidents that follow closely upon the election.