lOMoARcPSD|22517024
-CJUS230-Journal Eval#3
Criminal Justice Research and Writing (Liberty
University)
lOMoARcPSD|22517024
READING AND EVALUATING PEER-REVIEWED JOURNAL LITERATURE
Professor Presley
Liberty University
Evaluation Form
NAME: Date: Feb 12, 2018
Reference Citation in APA format
Whittle, T. N., & Parker, K.F. (2014). Public ideology, minority threat, and felony collateral
sanctions: A state-level analysis. Criminal Justice Review, 39(4). 432-454. doi: 1
0.1177/0734016814543352
1.
1. OUTLINE: Use the exact
titles and subtitles used in the
article
Use alphanumeric style
I. (APA level 1)
A. (APA level 2)
1. (APA level 3)
a. (APA level 4)
(1) (APA level 5)
II. (APA level 1) and so on
I. Introduction
II. Public Ideologies: Political and Religious
III. Minority Threat Hypothesis: Race, Ethnicity, and Crime
IV. Data and Methods
A. Data
V. Results
A. Public Ideologies
B. Minority Threat
VI. Discussion and Conclusion
VII. Appendix A
A. Examples of Legislated Felony Collateral Sanctions
1. Employment
2. Civic Participation
3. Family
4. Public Assistance
5. Drivers Licenses
6. Criminal Records
VIII. Appendix B
A. Question Wording for Punitive Measure
IX. Appendix C
A. Declaration of Conflicting Interests
B. Funding
C. Notes
2. PURPOSE: (Cite, as
accurately as possible, the
author’s purpose for writing
the
“We offer a state- level analysis of factors that produce differences in
collateral sanctions levels adopted by U.S. states” (p. 432).
lOMoARcPSD|22517024
READING AND EVALUATING PEER-REVIEWED JOURNAL LITERATURE
Professor Presley
Liberty University
3.
4.
1.
5.
A.
article. What was the author
trying to accomplish?
[Abstract, summary,
conclusion]
“With zero-truncated Poisson (ZTP) procedures, this study examines
whether religion, political climate, and minority threat explanations
result in states’ adopting greater collateral sanctions against convicted
felons” (p. 432).
“We find that race rather than ethnicity is an important predictor of the
collateral sanctions levels that states adopt; however, public ideology in
the form of conservatism and religiosity has a greater effect on
collateral sanctions” (p. 432).
3. KEYWORDS: (Keywords)
[Keywords after the abstract] “minority threat, public ideology, collateral sanctions, state-level,
reentry” (p. 432).
4. LITERATURE REVIEW
(Identify the most important and
relevant studies)
[Introduction, previous
literature says, other studies]
“While studies examine the consequences of felony convictions on
individuals, such as finding employment (Nelson, Deess, & Allen, 1999;
Sampson & Laub, 1993; Tripodi, Kim, & Bender, 2010; Uggen, 2000;
Visher & Kachnowski, 2009), redeveloping family ties and community
reintegration (Sampson & Laub, 1993; Travis, Solomon, & Waul, 2001;
Uggen, Manza, & Behrens, 2004; Uggen, Wakefield, and Western,
2005), research that examines the adoption of collateral sanctions
beyond felon disenfranchisement at the state level does not exist
(Manza & Uggen, 2006)” (p. 433).
“Furthermore, criminal histories record all arrests, not just those that
result in convictions. Thus, the population of individuals who are
affected by visible criminal record histories ranges from those who have
merely been arrested, with no resulting conviction, to those who have
been found guilty of a misdemeanor or felony (Jacobs, 2015)” (p. 388).
“For the purposes of this study, religion was gauged by using the
Pew Research Center’s U.S. Religious Landscape Survey. This
survey has been commonly used to measure religiosity (Pesta,
McDa- niel, &
Bertsch, 2010; Strayhorn & Strayhorn, 2009; and Reeve &
Basalik, 2011)” (p. 434).
5. MOST IMPORTANT
INFORMATION: Key
transitions
Transition signals
1. Addition-also, another,
next, first, other
2. Cause and effect-because,
since, therefore, as a
result
3. Comparison-like, equally,
just as
4. Contrast-but, yet, on the
contrary, however
“For example, despite evidence that legal employment greatly
contributes to ex-felons’ successful reentry (Pager, 2007; Wheelock,
2005), especially among those over 27 years of age (Uggen, 2000), state
and federal laws frequently prevent ex-felons from obtaining legal
employment in some occupational fields (Federal Interagency Reentry
Council, 2011)” (p. 433).
“Conservatism is generally associated with greater support for
punitiveness due to the belief that crime is an individual and immoral
choice and that criminals should be punished in a manner that is equally
harmful to the criminal (Burnham, 1970; Garland, 1990; Thorne, 1990)”
(p. 433).
“Specifically, we hypothesize that a higher percentage of conservative
lOMoARcPSD|22517024
READING AND EVALUATING PEER-REVIEWED JOURNAL LITERATURE
Professor Presley
Liberty University
5. Emphasis-most, above all,
key factor, especially
6. Illustration-for example,
for instance
7. Conclusion – finally,
in sum, in conclusion
voters and punitiveness at the state level will be directly associated with
greater collateral sanctions” (p. 434).
“Religion has also historically influenced the growth of punishments for
criminal acts (Erikson, 1966; Iganatieff, 1978; McGowen, 1995)” (p.
434).
“Additionally, dominant groups have greater negative attitudes
about minority groups and fear crime more when minority
populations are large” (p. 434).
“Using cross-national data, Kent (2010) found that nations with large
ethnic minority populations are the least likely to abolish the death
penalty” (p. 435).
“Furthermore, we acknowledge the potential for a curvilinear
relationship between minority threat and felony barriers in line with the
threat hypothesis” (p. 436).
“Finally, we take into account other structural features that are often
associated with crime and punishment as control measures in our study”
(p. 436).
“For the explanatory variables used in our study, we offer measures of
public ideology using multiple data sources including voting records,
2008 Pew Research Center data, and the 2010 U.S. Census of the
Population” (p. 438).
“We assess minority threat by type of minority presence. That is,
we include the percentage of Blacks in a state and the natural log of
the percentage of Hispanics to take into account both types of
minority
presences” (p. 438).
6. METHODOLOGY
(Key methods used)
[Methods: What model is
used, what is the experimental
design, our data was from]
“For the explanatory variables used in our study, we offer measures of
public ideology using multiple data sources including voting records,
2008 Pew Research Center data, and the 2010 U.S. Census of the
Population” (p. 438).
“The second measure of pubic ideologies punitiveness is a 2010 state-
level punitiveness indicator derived by multiple national survey data as
developed by Professor Peter Enns5 (2010, 2013), where data from the
‘‘General Social Survey, American National Election Studies, and the
iPOLL data bank provided by the Roper Center for Public Opinion
Research’’ regarding ‘‘attitudes towards the police and criminal justice
system, treatment of criminals, the death penalty, and gun ownership’’
were analyzed using multilevel regression and poststratification (MRP)
to generate state-level estimates of punitiveness of the public’s support
for tough on crime policies” (p. 438).
lOMoARcPSD|22517024
READING AND EVALUATING PEER-REVIEWED JOURNAL LITERATURE
Professor Presley
Liberty University
“Our final measure is an indicator of religiosity, which is the percentage
of people from each state who stated in the Pew Research Center’s 2008
U.S. Religious Landscape Survey that their religion is very important to
them” (p. 438).
“We assess minority threat by type of minority presence. That is, we
include the percentage of Blacks in a state and the natural log of the
percentage of Hispanics to take into account both types of minority
presences” (p. 438).
“For this statistical test, we add each theoretically relevant regressor into
the model one-at-a-time to determine if instability in the sign or
magnitude of the effect size occurs” (p. 439).
7. RESULTS/DISCUSSION
(Tables, data, graphical
representations, meaning)
[Results: the results show,
Table 1 shows]
“As shown here, the higher total roadblocks score indicates more
collateral sanctions adopted by the state. Those states included Alaska,
Virginia, South Carolina, and Georgia. On the other hand, states that
had the lowest roadblock scores included Illinois, New York,
California, and Hawaii” (p. 437).
“Utilizing multiple data sources allows us to offer multiple measures to
capture our conceptual arguments, in addition to including important
control measures that are often used in macro-level studies” (p. 438).
“As shown in Model 3, conservatism, state punitiveness, and religiosity
have a statistically significant influence on state-level collateral
sanctions, when controlling for other theoretically relevant predictors
and the structural features of U.S. states” (p. 441).
“As expected, as the growth in the Black population reaches a sizable
proportion, a positive relationship is found with collateral sanctions” (p.
442).
“Our findings indicate that greater presence of Black citizens in a state
leads to greater collateral sanctions in states with substantial African
American residents once the percentage-Black measure was squared
and included in Model 3” (p. 443).
8.
LIMITATIONS/DISCUSSION
(Limitations of the study)
[Limitations, Discussion: One
limitation of our study is,
other limitations]
“While our studies provide support for the role public ideologies and
racial threat play in the application of legal barriers to convicted felons,
we did not examine how minority threat and public ideologies relate to
particular types of sanctions” (p. 444).
“To tease these possible relationships out, future analyses should look at
the relationship between public ideologies, racial threat and the different
types of collateral sanctions often applied to convicted felons in state
and
federal laws” (p. 444).
lOMoARcPSD|22517024
READING AND EVALUATING PEER-REVIEWED JOURNAL LITERATURE
Professor Presley
Liberty University
“Future research should investigate the relationship between
stigmatizing collateral sanction types and levels and state-level
recidivism rates” (p. 445).
9. CONCLUSION
(The main conclusion(s) of the
author(s))
[Conclusion: In
summary, Finally, In
conclusion]
“Minorities are disproportionately impacted negatively by the criminal
justice system in the form of being suspected, arrested, convicted,
incarcerated, and executed at higher rates (Free, 2001; Petersilia, 1985;
Reiman, 2007; Wordes, Bynum, & Cor- ley, 1994)” (p. 444).
“Collateral sanctions, such as disenfranchisement and restricting ex-
felons from public assistance, driving, working in particular fields,
adoption, and so on, prevent full reintegration of ex-felons back into
society, possibly resulting in greater recidivism as a result of diminished
social bonds and collective efficacy or greater strain” (p. 444).
“States with large minority and conservative populations are more likely
to have higher stigmatizing collateral sanction rates and therefore may
have higher rates of recidivism as a result” (p. 445).
10. YOUR OPINION OF
THE PAPER
I think this was an excellent journal. The authors were well respected
and cited over six pages of references throughout the paper. They
arranged their data findings into tables which were easy to read, and
they also explained their process along with their findings.
