Showing papers by "Francis T. Cullen published in 2022"
TL;DR: Given the complicated historical and contemporary relationship between law enforcement and African Americans, academic and popular commentary have focused intently on the existence of conflict between the two groups as discussed by the authors, and have focused on the fact that the two sides are inherently at odds.
Abstract: Given the complicated historical and contemporary relationship between law enforcement and African Americans, academic and popular commentary have focused intently on the existence of conflict betw...
11 citations
18 Mar 2022
TL;DR: The authors conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis of the school violence and victimization literature and found that the strongest correlates of school violence perpetration were antisocial behavior, deviant peers, antisocial attitudes, victimization, and peer rejection.
Abstract: School violence is a significant social concern. To better understand its sources, a comprehensive meta-analysis of the school violence and victimization literature was undertaken. Across 761 studies, the relative effects of 30 different individual, school, and community level correlates were assessed (8,790 effect size estimates). Violence and victimization were conceptualized broadly to include various forms of aggression and crime at school. The results revealed that the strongest correlates of school violence perpetration were antisocial behavior, deviant peers, antisocial attitudes, victimization, and peer rejection; and that the strongest correlates of school victimization were prior/other victimization, social competence, risk avoidance, antisocial behavior, and peer rejection. Extracurricular activities and school security devices had among the weakest associations in the meta-analysis, and several traditional criminological predictors did not perform well in the school context. We conclude with recommendations for theory, future research, and policy.
9 citations
TL;DR: In this article , a county-level longitudinal analysis of immigration and drug overdose deaths both overall and by substance type for the 2000 to 2015 period was provided, showing that immigration is not associated with higher levels of overdose or homicide deaths and when effects are significant, immigration is linked to lower levels of drug overdose mortality across multiple substances and destination types.
Abstract: Public and political discourse has routinely suggested that immigration is linked to higher community levels of violence and drug problems. In contrast to these claims, research has consistently shown that immigration is not associated with greater violence at the macro level. However, few studies have examined the links between immigration flows and community drug problems. The current study seeks to address this gap in research by providing a county-level longitudinal analysis of immigration and drug overdose deaths both overall and by substance type for the 2000 to 2015 period and provides an analysis of homicide for comparison with prior immigration–crime research. In addition, this analysis compares immigration–overdose relationships across immigrant destination types. The current project relies on overdose and homicide data drawn from the Centers for Disease Control's Restricted Access Multiple Cause of Death Mortality files combined with data on county social, economic, health, and legal contexts drawn from multiple macro-level data sources. Findings reveal that immigration is not associated with higher levels of overdose or homicide deaths, and when effects are significant, immigration is linked to lower levels of overdose mortality across multiple substances and destination types.
4 citations
01 Jan 2022
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors provided a longitudinal macro-level analysis of the community "determinants of death" for overdose (overall and by substance type), homicide, and suicide.
Abstract: A growing body of research has begun to identify the social and ecological predictors of community overdose rates. However, questions remain about these relationships, and it is unclear whether the predictors of community overdose concentrations mirror those of other fatal social problems, such as homicide and suicide. Drawing on three leading ecological theories of overdose concentrations, the present study provides a longitudinal macro-level analysis of the community “determinants of death” for overdose (overall and by substance type), homicide, and suicide. Specifically, the authors use Centers for Disease Control and Prevention restricted-access mortality data, combined with measures of community social, economic, legal, and health indicators for the period from 2000 to 2015. Findings from time-series models reveal that county concentrations of overdose are linked to multiple theoretically driven factors—including opioid prescription rates, population decline, county health problems, and manufacturing employment—with several key similarities in the determinants of death across overdose, homicide, and suicide.
4 citations
TL;DR: This paper found that the public severely underestimates the death toll of the opioid crisis compared to other fatal events, and that public perception of who and where have been most affected is fairly accurate, and such views are highly consistent across different locations, contexts and sociodemographic characteristics of places and respondents.
Abstract: ABSTRACT The opioid crisis has claimed more than a half-million deaths over the past two decades and is one of the leading causes of injury deaths in the United States. The current study examines: 1) public opinion on the severity of the opioid crisis in terms of lives lost compared to other fatal social events, 2) opinions on who has been most affected by the opioid crisis, and the accuracy of these perceptions, 3) opinions on who is responsible or “to blame” for the crisis and who should fix it and 4) the individual and contextual characteristics that are related to these perceptions. Using data from an October 2019 Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) survey, the Center for Disease Control, and the U.S. Census, we find that the public severely underestimates the death toll of the opioid crisis compared to other fatal events. We also find that public perception of who and where have been most affected is fairly accurate, and such views are highly consistent across different locations, contexts, and sociodemographic characteristics of places and respondents. Additionally, we find that the public collectively views pharmaceutical companies and doctors as responsible for contributing to and fixing the opioid overdose crisis.
2 citations
TL;DR: This paper found that participants who expressed strong faith in Trump were less likely to support sending an adult male who committed bank fraud to prison, but they were more supportive of deporting the individual to another country.
Abstract: The first goal of the study was to investigate the willingness of former President Trump's supporters to punish a particular form of white-collar crime (i.e., bank fraud). The second objective was to test whether the race of the person who committed the bank fraud influenced Trump supporters' willingness to punish.This study used data from factorial vignettes that were administered to a national sample of adults in 2021 (N = 1509). A 2 (race of the individual who committed bank fraud) × 2 (prior criminal record) × 2 (COVID-19 related fraud) between-subject experimental design was used. Multivariate techniques were used to regress the dependent variables (e.g., length of prison sentence) onto the faith in Trump scale, the experimental conditions, and other variables.Participants who expressed a strong faith in Trump were less likely to support sending an adult male who committed bank fraud to prison, but they were more supportive of deporting the individual to another country. The effect of faith in Trump changed when the race of the person who committed bank fraud was manipulated. Specifically, participants who expressed greater faith in Trump were more likely to view bank fraud as harmful and wrong, more likely to support the use of prison and recommend longer prison sentences, and expressed greater support for deporting the individual when he was depicted as Chinese American.Allegiance to the former president likely increased the targeting of Chinese Americans as out-group members in need of greater social control.The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11292-022-09528-8.
1 citations
TL;DR: In this article , the authors examined deviant identity in relation to youth offending by combining items tapping both self-appraisal and reflected appraisal, and found that deviant identities is a robust predictor of offending for subgroups of adolescents involved in offending at any level.
Abstract: This study examines deviant identity in relation to youth offending by combining items tapping both self-appraisal and reflected appraisal. In particular, using survey data from 3,446 Korean youth across five waves of the Korea Youth Panel Survey (KYPS), findings from group-based trajectory modeling (GBTM) present four distinct offending groups—a high-rate chronic group, stable non-offending group, adolescence-limited group, and declining group. Then, findings from the multinomial logit model reveal that deviant identity is a robust predictor of offending for subgroups of adolescents involved in offending at any level in comparison to stable non-offenders. Accordingly, this study supports the idea that deviant identity should be considered as a prominent predictor of a variety of types of youth offending.
1 citations
TL;DR: This paper found that people are more supportive of ransomware use when the actors are from their own in-group, and the outcomes benefit their ingroup members, while the more strongly participants endorsed the moral foundations of authority and harm/care, the more supportive they were of the use of ransomware that may benefit others from their in group.
Abstract: Ransomware attacks have become a critical security threat worldwide. However, existing research on ransomware has largely ignored public opinion. This initial study identifies patterns in the American public’s support for the use of ransomware, specifically when it is framed to provide benefits to others (i.e., in-group members). Drawing on the Robin Hood decision-making literature and Moral Foundations Theory, we offer theoretical predictions regarding ransomware support. In a survey of 1013 Americans, we embedded a split-ballot experiment in which respondents were randomly assigned to indicate their level of support or opposition to one of two sets of six ransomware scenarios. We manipulated the nationality, authority level, and political affiliation of the actors. We find that people are more supportive of ransomware use when the actors are from their own in-group, and the outcomes benefit their in-group members. Also, the more strongly participants endorsed the moral foundations of authority and harm/care, the more supportive they were of the use of ransomware that may benefit others from their in-group. These findings suggest political actors may be able to generate public support for morally questionable actions by emphasizing in-group benefits and the Robin Hood nature of an attack (e.g., outcome-based morality).
1 citations
15 Nov 2022
TL;DR: The "Build Back Better Prison Experiment" as mentioned in this paper was proposed by the Biden Administration to foster a new era of progress in American corrections, with the goal to establish prisons that are rational in their planning, are evidence-based, improve offenders' lives, and foster an enlightened corrections.
Abstract: Research Summary The United States is at a turning point in the history of corrections. Suddenly and surprisingly, the era of mass incarceration ended around 2010. Since that time, prison populations, public punitiveness, and get-tough rhetoric have declined. A challenging question remains, however: Now what? Doing more of the same is foolish but likely. Prison reform is inhibited by the twin realities that states have limited budgets and have existing prisons that are rarely shuttered. New thinking is needed to move beyond these restrictions. One guide for a cognitive shift is Steven Pinker's Enlightenment Now in which he argues that sustained improvement in human well-being in the United States and across the globe is due to the Enlightenment principles of reason, science, humanism, and progress. In this context, an “enlightened corrections” is possible in which policies and practices are evaluated by the four ideals articulated by Pinker. As one example, mass imprisonment is shown to be irrational, unscientific, inhumane, and bereft of a future. By contrast, more promising policies seek to nourish offenders by offering redemption and by using community supervision to build quality relationships that provide a means for targeting risk factors for intervention. Policy Implications The key policy implication is the proposal to place prison reform within the Biden Administration's support for infrastructure improvement. Funded by the federal government, a “Build Back Better Prison Experiment” would be undertaken in which 10 experimental prisons—designed from a clean slate and selected through a competition—would be created and evaluated. The goal is to establish prisons that are rational in their planning, are evidence based, improve offenders’ lives, and foster a new era of progress in American corrections.
TL;DR: This paper examined the perceived national and personal threat of COVID-19 in the United States using data from national surveys conducted a year apart, in March 2020 and March 2021, and demonstrated that White nationalism is associated with discounting the national but not personal threat.
Abstract: After more than one million COVID-19 deaths and ninety-one million cases in the United States, it is clear that COVID-19 has and will continue to pose a threat to the health of the United States’ population and economy. However, despite the clear and early warnings from the CDC, many have continued to downplay the impact of the pandemic, which has arguably inflamed the perniciousness of the virus. Using data from national surveys conducted a year apart, in March 2020 and March 2021, we examine the perceived national and personal threat of COVID-19 in the United States. We argue that collective narcissism—in the form of White nationalism—has blinded some Americans to this national threat, leading to an inadequate collective response that was further exacerbated by the political leadership of former President Donald Trump. We demonstrate that White nationalism is associated with discounting the national but not personal threat of the virus. This was true both early in the pandemic (2020) and later (2021), after the virus had ravaged the country.