東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Measuring Punitiveness: Exploring State Variation in Penal Controls.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Measuring Punitiveness: Exploring State Variation in Penal Controls./
作者:	Martin, Brittany T.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2021,
面頁冊數:	117 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-04, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International83-04A.
標題:	Sociology. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28646907
ISBN:	9798538159659

Measuring Punitiveness: Exploring State Variation in Penal Controls.
Martin, Brittany T.

Measuring Punitiveness: Exploring State Variation in Penal Controls. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2021 - 117 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-04, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Georgia, 2021.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

Punishment research focuses heavily on mass incarceration and the "punitive turn" in the United States. However, most individuals involved in the criminal legal system never spend time in prison. Building from Garland's (2020) theory of American penal exceptionalism, the current study uses a measurement of punitiveness focusing on state variation in penal controls. First, I develop a state-level typology of punitiveness that includes two dimensions: court-ordered punishments and collateral sanctions policies. Second, I investigate how states' placement in this typology is associated with known social correlates of punitiveness, such as conservative political ideology and racial/ethnic composition from 2010 through 2016. My analysis in study one highlights that focusing on mass incarceration obscures the full story of state variation in punitiveness (Frost 2006,2008; Hamilton 2014; Kutateladze, 2009). First, by using standardized scores (Z-scores) rather than rankings, my analysis shows states are more alike across measures of penal controls than previously presented. Second, by creating a Court-Ordered Punishments Scale using measures that capture the sentencing outcomes (rather than rates) of states to use prison and probation combined with a scale of collateral sanctions policies, my typology is a better operationalization of how people are being sentenced for a felony-level conviction in each state. Study two further contextualizes the state-level variation in punitiveness by examining how each category in my typology is associated with state characteristics that have been found to be correlated with harsh punishment. This study adds to the ongoing conversation regarding U.S. exceptionalism in penal control, providing some support for Garland's (2020) theory. I find that states with less generous welfare benefits are more likely to be in the category with high levels of both forms of punishment in comparison to all other categories of punitiveness. I also find mixed support for claims made in previous empirical and theoretical research regarding the relationship between punitiveness and a state's racial and ethnic composition as well as conservative political ideology. This study's findings have significant implications for understanding variation in the use of penal controls across states. For example, even if mass incarceration were eliminated, there would still be significant issues with excessive use of other penal controls such as mass supervision, exclusion, and disqualifications that researchers and policymakers must address. In addition, findings from study two are inconsistent with predictions from traditional theories often used to explain state variation in punitiveness, this suggests that new theoretical approaches may be needed.

ISBN: 9798538159659Subjects--Topical Terms:

516174
Sociology.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Collateral Sanctions

Measuring Punitiveness: Exploring State Variation in Penal Controls.
LDR:04036nmm a2200397 4500 001 2345162
005 20220531132453.5
008 241004s2021 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798538159659
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI28646907
035 $a AAI28646907
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Martin, Brittany T. $0 (orcid)0000-0002-7107-3077 $3 3684052
245 1 0 $a Measuring Punitiveness: Exploring State Variation in Penal Controls.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2021
300 $a 117 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 83-04, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Clay-Warner, Jody;Shannon, Sarah K. S.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Georgia, 2021.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a Punishment research focuses heavily on mass incarceration and the "punitive turn" in the United States. However, most individuals involved in the criminal legal system never spend time in prison. Building from Garland's (2020) theory of American penal exceptionalism, the current study uses a measurement of punitiveness focusing on state variation in penal controls. First, I develop a state-level typology of punitiveness that includes two dimensions: court-ordered punishments and collateral sanctions policies. Second, I investigate how states' placement in this typology is associated with known social correlates of punitiveness, such as conservative political ideology and racial/ethnic composition from 2010 through 2016. My analysis in study one highlights that focusing on mass incarceration obscures the full story of state variation in punitiveness (Frost 2006,2008; Hamilton 2014; Kutateladze, 2009). First, by using standardized scores (Z-scores) rather than rankings, my analysis shows states are more alike across measures of penal controls than previously presented. Second, by creating a Court-Ordered Punishments Scale using measures that capture the sentencing outcomes (rather than rates) of states to use prison and probation combined with a scale of collateral sanctions policies, my typology is a better operationalization of how people are being sentenced for a felony-level conviction in each state. Study two further contextualizes the state-level variation in punitiveness by examining how each category in my typology is associated with state characteristics that have been found to be correlated with harsh punishment. This study adds to the ongoing conversation regarding U.S. exceptionalism in penal control, providing some support for Garland's (2020) theory. I find that states with less generous welfare benefits are more likely to be in the category with high levels of both forms of punishment in comparison to all other categories of punitiveness. I also find mixed support for claims made in previous empirical and theoretical research regarding the relationship between punitiveness and a state's racial and ethnic composition as well as conservative political ideology. This study's findings have significant implications for understanding variation in the use of penal controls across states. For example, even if mass incarceration were eliminated, there would still be significant issues with excessive use of other penal controls such as mass supervision, exclusion, and disqualifications that researchers and policymakers must address. In addition, findings from study two are inconsistent with predictions from traditional theories often used to explain state variation in punitiveness, this suggests that new theoretical approaches may be needed.
590 $a School code: 0077.
650 4 $a Sociology. $3 516174
650 4 $a Criminology. $3 533274
650 4 $a Law. $3 600858
650 4 $a Law enforcement. $3 607408
653 $a Collateral Sanctions
653 $a Court-Ordered Punishments
653 $a Criminal Punishment
653 $a Felony Convictions
653 $a Penal Controls
653 $a Punitiveness
690 $a 0626
690 $a 0627
690 $a 0398
690 $a 0206
710 2 $a University of Georgia. $b Sociology - PHD. $3 3682107
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 83-04A.
790 $a 0077
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2021
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28646907