Gender and the Peremptory Challenge: Separating the Effects of Race and Gender in Jury Selection

IF 1.1 4区 社会学 Q3 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Women & Criminal Justice Pub Date : 2020-07-12 DOI:10.1080/08974454.2020.1785372
Whitney DeCamp
{"title":"Gender and the Peremptory Challenge: Separating the Effects of Race and Gender in Jury Selection","authors":"Whitney DeCamp","doi":"10.1080/08974454.2020.1785372","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Gender- and race-based discrimination in jury selection is unconstitutional in the United States. Nevertheless, court cases and empirical evidence suggest that discrimination on such characteristics, especially race, continues to occur through peremptory challenges. Statistical evidence of the gender effect, however, is more limited and has not previously incorporated controls in race-specific analyses to address non-gender-based explanations for gender differences. The present study examines gender differences in peremptory challenges using data from criminal jury trials in Mississippi. Race-specific analyses and propensity score matching are used to isolate the impact of gender from other measurable effects. Results indicate weak and non-significant gender differences for peremptory challenges used by the prosecution, and weak-to-moderate and non-significant gender differences for peremptory challenges used by the defense. This suggests that gender differences in the use of peremptory challenges may be the result of racial differences and other factors rather than a true gender-based effect.","PeriodicalId":51745,"journal":{"name":"Women & Criminal Justice","volume":"31 1","pages":"159 - 173"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/08974454.2020.1785372","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Women & Criminal Justice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08974454.2020.1785372","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract Gender- and race-based discrimination in jury selection is unconstitutional in the United States. Nevertheless, court cases and empirical evidence suggest that discrimination on such characteristics, especially race, continues to occur through peremptory challenges. Statistical evidence of the gender effect, however, is more limited and has not previously incorporated controls in race-specific analyses to address non-gender-based explanations for gender differences. The present study examines gender differences in peremptory challenges using data from criminal jury trials in Mississippi. Race-specific analyses and propensity score matching are used to isolate the impact of gender from other measurable effects. Results indicate weak and non-significant gender differences for peremptory challenges used by the prosecution, and weak-to-moderate and non-significant gender differences for peremptory challenges used by the defense. This suggests that gender differences in the use of peremptory challenges may be the result of racial differences and other factors rather than a true gender-based effect.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
性别与强制性挑战:分离种族和性别对陪审团选择的影响
摘要在美国,陪审团选择中基于性别和种族的歧视是违宪的。然而,法庭案例和经验证据表明,基于这些特征的歧视,特别是种族歧视,继续通过强制性挑战而发生。然而,性别影响的统计证据更为有限,以前没有将控制纳入针对种族的分析,以解决对性别差异的非性别解释。本研究利用密西西比州刑事陪审团审判的数据,考察了强制性挑战中的性别差异。种族特异性分析和倾向得分匹配用于将性别的影响与其他可衡量的影响隔离开来。结果表明,检方使用的强制性质疑存在微弱和非显著的性别差异,辩方使用的强制质疑存在微弱到中等和非显著性别差异。这表明,在使用强制性挑战方面的性别差异可能是种族差异和其他因素的结果,而不是真正的基于性别的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Women & Criminal Justice is the only periodical devoted specifically to scholarly interdisciplinary and international research on all concerns related to women and criminal justice. It provides scholars with a single forum devoted to this critical specialty area in the fields of criminal justice, human rights, law, politics, sociology, social work, and women"s studies. Both qualitative and quantitative studies are welcomed, as are studies that test theories about women as victims, professionals and offenders.
期刊最新文献
An Exploration of Officer Gender and Use of Force Incidents in a Transit Police Department Safekeeping of Pregnant People Experiencing Incarceration. "We don't wanna birth it here": A qualitative study of Southern jail personnel approaches to pregnancy. Psychopathy and Reoffending Among Incarcerated Women How to Start over: Coping Mechanisms during Individual Women Displacement by Organized Crime
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1