塑造被监禁青年不公正观念的个人经历和代理经历——两种衡量标准的比较

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Victims & Offenders Pub Date : 2022-01-03 DOI:10.1080/15564886.2021.2014009
Elizabeth N. Hartsell, J. Lane, L. Lanza-Kaduce
{"title":"塑造被监禁青年不公正观念的个人经历和代理经历——两种衡量标准的比较","authors":"Elizabeth N. Hartsell, J. Lane, L. Lanza-Kaduce","doi":"10.1080/15564886.2021.2014009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We compared the relationships between incarcerated youths’ injustice perceptions and demographic variables and personal and vicarious experiences with the justice system using indexes of injustice derived from Matza and Tyler. The two injustice frameworks represent different academic traditions in ways that raise different prospects. Matza contextualizes his formulation of injustice in group processes that emphasize shared neutralization of regulating norms because of injustice. That emphasis is absent in Tyler. Tyler’s work has led to an invariance claim across demographics that is not postulated by Matza. We analyzed data from the Florida Faith and Community-Based Delinquency Treatment Initiative. We found nonwhite youths perceived more injustice as measured by both indexes. In a boys-only subsample, younger boys perceived more injustice measured by the Tyler index. Vicarious exposure via friends’ experiences with police related to higher perceived levels of injustice only on the Matza index. We encourage researchers to be precise in their operationalizations and measurement of injustice perceptions and to consider the theoretical grounding of their research in making injustice measurement choices.","PeriodicalId":47085,"journal":{"name":"Victims & Offenders","volume":"18 1","pages":"646 - 672"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Personal and Vicarious Experiences that Shape Incarcerated Youths’ Perceptions of Injustice- Comparing Two Measures\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth N. Hartsell, J. Lane, L. Lanza-Kaduce\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15564886.2021.2014009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT We compared the relationships between incarcerated youths’ injustice perceptions and demographic variables and personal and vicarious experiences with the justice system using indexes of injustice derived from Matza and Tyler. The two injustice frameworks represent different academic traditions in ways that raise different prospects. Matza contextualizes his formulation of injustice in group processes that emphasize shared neutralization of regulating norms because of injustice. That emphasis is absent in Tyler. Tyler’s work has led to an invariance claim across demographics that is not postulated by Matza. We analyzed data from the Florida Faith and Community-Based Delinquency Treatment Initiative. We found nonwhite youths perceived more injustice as measured by both indexes. In a boys-only subsample, younger boys perceived more injustice measured by the Tyler index. Vicarious exposure via friends’ experiences with police related to higher perceived levels of injustice only on the Matza index. We encourage researchers to be precise in their operationalizations and measurement of injustice perceptions and to consider the theoretical grounding of their research in making injustice measurement choices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47085,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Victims & Offenders\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"646 - 672\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Victims & Offenders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2021.2014009\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Victims & Offenders","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2021.2014009","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:我们使用Matza和Tyler的不公正指数,比较了被监禁青年的不公正认知与人口统计变量以及个人和替代经历与司法系统之间的关系。这两个不公正框架代表了不同的学术传统,带来了不同的前景。Matza将他对群体过程中不公正的表述置于背景中,强调由于不公正而共同中和规范。泰勒身上没有这种强调。泰勒的工作导致了一种跨人口统计学的不变性主张,而这并不是Matza所假设的。我们分析了佛罗里达州基于信仰和社区的犯罪治疗倡议的数据。我们发现,从这两个指标来看,非白人青年更容易感受到不公正。在仅限男孩的子样本中,年龄较小的男孩认为泰勒指数衡量的不公正程度更高。仅在Matza指数上,通过朋友与警察的经历进行的恶毒暴露与更高的不公正程度有关。我们鼓励研究人员在对不公正感知的操作和测量中保持精确,并在做出不公正测量选择时考虑其研究的理论基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Personal and Vicarious Experiences that Shape Incarcerated Youths’ Perceptions of Injustice- Comparing Two Measures
ABSTRACT We compared the relationships between incarcerated youths’ injustice perceptions and demographic variables and personal and vicarious experiences with the justice system using indexes of injustice derived from Matza and Tyler. The two injustice frameworks represent different academic traditions in ways that raise different prospects. Matza contextualizes his formulation of injustice in group processes that emphasize shared neutralization of regulating norms because of injustice. That emphasis is absent in Tyler. Tyler’s work has led to an invariance claim across demographics that is not postulated by Matza. We analyzed data from the Florida Faith and Community-Based Delinquency Treatment Initiative. We found nonwhite youths perceived more injustice as measured by both indexes. In a boys-only subsample, younger boys perceived more injustice measured by the Tyler index. Vicarious exposure via friends’ experiences with police related to higher perceived levels of injustice only on the Matza index. We encourage researchers to be precise in their operationalizations and measurement of injustice perceptions and to consider the theoretical grounding of their research in making injustice measurement choices.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Victims & Offenders
Victims & Offenders CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
9.10%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Victims & Offenders is a peer-reviewed journal that provides an interdisciplinary and international forum for the dissemination of new research, policies, and practices related to both victimization and offending throughout the life course. Our aim is to provide an opportunity for researchers -- both in the United States and internationally -- from a wide range of disciplines (criminal justice, psychology, sociology, political science, economics, public health, and social work) to publish articles that examine issues from a variety of perspectives in a unique, interdisciplinary forum. We are interested in both quantitative and qualitative research, systematic, evidence-based reviews, and articles that focus on theory development related to offenders and victims.
期刊最新文献
Veterans Treatment Courts: A Nationwide Review of Enacting and Eligibility State Statutes. The Influence of Offender Motivation on Unwanted Pursuit Perpetration Among College Students Relatives’ Understanding of Perpetrators of Elder Family Financial Exploitation: A Bioecological Approach to Understanding Risk Factors What Separates Offenders Who are Not Victimized from Offenders Who are Victimized? Results from a Nationally Representative Sample of Males and Females Scams, Cons, Frauds, and Deceptions
×
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