The Experts below are selected from a list of 3558 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Shaun L. Gabbidon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Revisiting the generality of public opinion on Racial Profiling: a statewide study of white perceptions
Journal of Crime and Justice, 2014Co-Authors: George E. Higgins, Shaun L. GabbidonAbstract:Within the last two decades, scholars have studied public opinion on Racial Profiling in multiple contexts, yet there have been limited studies that have examined whether public opinion on Racial Profiling is consistent across these unique contexts. Using a random sample of White adults from Pennsylvania, we studied whether perceptions on the discriminatory nature of Racial Profiling, and the perceived effectiveness of this practice in airports, retail settings, and traffic stops, form two distinct latent measures. We found that perceptions of Racial Profiling as discriminatory are general across these multiple contexts; the same was found to be true for perceptions of effectiveness as well. These latent measures also had different correlates by age and gender.
-
Black Supporters of Racial Profiling A Demographic Profile
Criminal Justice Policy Review, 2012Co-Authors: Shaun L. Gabbidon, George E. Higgins, Kideste M. Wilder-bonnerAbstract:As an anomaly of extant literature that maintains Blacks as a collective are less supportive of Racial Profiling than other ethnic groups, this article explores the backgrounds of Blacks who support the practice of Racial Profiling (referred to as Black Supporters). This study analyzed a national Gallup poll that included measures on Profiling and had a significant number of Black respondents (N = 534). Black Supporters tended to be female; live in the Southern United States; and be politically conservative. Although multivariate analyses revealed few differences between Black Supporters and nonsupporters, the study represents an earnest attempt to explore Black support for a policing strategy that has both historically and contemporarily had negative effects on Black communities. We conclude the article by discussing the benefits of studying Black Supporters.
-
Public Support for Racial Profiling in Airports Results From a Statewide Poll
Criminal Justice Policy Review, 2011Co-Authors: Shaun L. Gabbidon, George E. Higgins, Matthew A. NelsonAbstract:This article examines the public opinion of randomly selected Pennsylvanians on their support for Racial Profiling at airports. The 2009 Penn State Poll revealed that most Pennsylvanians felt that Profiling was occurring at airports—but did not support the practice. Building on prior research, the research introduced three new measures into the area of public opinion on Racial Profiling. These included the role of perceived effectiveness, perceived discrimination, and ethical values in influencing public opinion on Racial Profiling. Respondents who felt Racial Profiling in airports was effective and was discriminatory were more likely to believe it was occurring. In terms of support for Racial Profiling, those who felt the practice was discriminatory and unethical were less likely to support it, whereas conversely, those who felt the practice was effective tended to support its use. We argue that the public needs to be better informed about the strategies that have been proven to be most effective in redu...
-
PERCEPTIONS OF CONSUMER Racial Profiling AND NEGATIVE EMOTIONS An Exploratory Study
Criminal Justice and Behavior, 2008Co-Authors: George E. Higgins, Shaun L. GabbidonAbstract:Racial Profiling has been an interest among society and scholars for several years. The main focus of Racial Profiling has been on law enforcement’s use of the technique, with little investigation of it occurring in consumer environments, that is, consumer Racial Profiling (CRP). Moreover, even less research has focused on the negative emotions that occur as a result of perceptions of CRP. Using data from a telephone survey of citizens of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the present study indicates that perceptions of experiencing CRP do result in negative emotions. Furthermore, the present study identifies a profile of individuals who are likely to experience these negative emotions due to perceptions of CRP. The implications of these findings are discussed.
-
Examining the Generality of Citizens' Views on Racial Profiling in Diverse Situational Contexts:
Criminal Justice and Behavior, 2008Co-Authors: George E. Higgins, Shaun L. Gabbidon, Kareem L. JordanAbstract:This article examines the generality of citizens' views concerning Racial Profiling across several contexts. More specifically, the research investigated whether citizens' perceptions regarding the widespread nature of Racial Profiling and their belief whether this Profiling is justified converged when considering the practice in diverse settings, such as during traffic stops, in retail establishments, and at airports. Using data from a nationally representative poll with an oversample of Blacks and Hispanics, the results of the structural equation model analysis supported the supposition that perceptions regarding Racial Profiling across contexts form one latent construct. The perceptions of airport, traffic stop, and consumer Racial Profiling—in the context of widespread nature and justification—form two general latent measures. These perceptions differ based on race, age, sex, and income.
George E. Higgins - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Issue of Racial Profiling in Traffic Stop Citations
Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 2017Co-Authors: Anthony G. Vito, Elizabeth L. Grossi, George E. HigginsAbstract:This study addresses Racial Profiling when the traffic stop outcome is a citation. This study uses focal concerns theory as a theoretical explanation for police officer decision-making while using ...
-
Revisiting the generality of public opinion on Racial Profiling: a statewide study of white perceptions
Journal of Crime and Justice, 2014Co-Authors: George E. Higgins, Shaun L. GabbidonAbstract:Within the last two decades, scholars have studied public opinion on Racial Profiling in multiple contexts, yet there have been limited studies that have examined whether public opinion on Racial Profiling is consistent across these unique contexts. Using a random sample of White adults from Pennsylvania, we studied whether perceptions on the discriminatory nature of Racial Profiling, and the perceived effectiveness of this practice in airports, retail settings, and traffic stops, form two distinct latent measures. We found that perceptions of Racial Profiling as discriminatory are general across these multiple contexts; the same was found to be true for perceptions of effectiveness as well. These latent measures also had different correlates by age and gender.
-
Searches and Traffic Stops: Racial Profiling and Capriciousness
Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, 2012Co-Authors: George E. Higgins, Gennaro F. Vito, Elizabeth L. Grossi, Anthony G. VitoAbstract:The purpose of the present study is to examine traffic stop data—in particular data on searches—to better understand Racial Profiling. We use a measure of capriciousness to understand whether the decision to search occurs at random. Using data from more than 40,000 traffic stops from Louisville, Kentucky, the present study finds that race is one of many factors that are used in the determination of a search. For the overall, White, and Black samples, we find that the decision to search occurs at random, suggesting that Racial Profiling is not occurring in these data.
-
Black Supporters of Racial Profiling A Demographic Profile
Criminal Justice Policy Review, 2012Co-Authors: Shaun L. Gabbidon, George E. Higgins, Kideste M. Wilder-bonnerAbstract:As an anomaly of extant literature that maintains Blacks as a collective are less supportive of Racial Profiling than other ethnic groups, this article explores the backgrounds of Blacks who support the practice of Racial Profiling (referred to as Black Supporters). This study analyzed a national Gallup poll that included measures on Profiling and had a significant number of Black respondents (N = 534). Black Supporters tended to be female; live in the Southern United States; and be politically conservative. Although multivariate analyses revealed few differences between Black Supporters and nonsupporters, the study represents an earnest attempt to explore Black support for a policing strategy that has both historically and contemporarily had negative effects on Black communities. We conclude the article by discussing the benefits of studying Black Supporters.
-
Public Support for Racial Profiling in Airports Results From a Statewide Poll
Criminal Justice Policy Review, 2011Co-Authors: Shaun L. Gabbidon, George E. Higgins, Matthew A. NelsonAbstract:This article examines the public opinion of randomly selected Pennsylvanians on their support for Racial Profiling at airports. The 2009 Penn State Poll revealed that most Pennsylvanians felt that Profiling was occurring at airports—but did not support the practice. Building on prior research, the research introduced three new measures into the area of public opinion on Racial Profiling. These included the role of perceived effectiveness, perceived discrimination, and ethical values in influencing public opinion on Racial Profiling. Respondents who felt Racial Profiling in airports was effective and was discriminatory were more likely to believe it was occurring. In terms of support for Racial Profiling, those who felt the practice was discriminatory and unethical were less likely to support it, whereas conversely, those who felt the practice was effective tended to support its use. We argue that the public needs to be better informed about the strategies that have been proven to be most effective in redu...
Annabelle Lever - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Racial Profiling and the Political Philosophy of Race
Oxford Handbooks Online, 2017Co-Authors: Annabelle LeverAbstract:Philosophical reflection on Racial Profiling tends to take one of two forms. The first sees it as an example of ‘statistical discrimination,’ (SD), raising the question of when, if ever, probabilistic generalisations about group behaviour or characteristics can be used to judge particular individuals.(Applbaum 2014; Harcourt 2004; Hellman, 2014; Risse and Zeckhauser 2004; Risse 2007; Lippert-Rasmussen 2006; Lippert-Rasmussen 2007; Lippert-Rasmussen 2014) . This approach treats Racial Profiling as one example amongst many others of a general problem in egalitarian political philosophy, occasioned by the fact that treating people as equals does not always require, or permit, us to treat them the same. The second form is concerned with how Racial Profiling illuminates the nature, justification, and reproduction of hierarchies of power and privilege based on skin colour and morphology. This form of reflection on Racial Profiling is therefore less about the justification for judging people based on the characteristics of the group to which they (appear to) belong, and more concerned with the specific ways in which the association of Racialized minorities – and, in particular, black people – with crime, contributes to, and reflects, Racial inequality, and oppression.(Kennedy 1998; Zack, 2015; Lever, 2005; Lever 2007). Both approaches to Profiling have much to recommend them and, taken together, they form an essential component of the political philosophy of race. The statistical approach has the merits of linking Racial Profiling, as practice, to a body of other practices that generate and justify inequalities based on factors other than race, but it typically offers little by way of insight into the role of Racial Profiling itself in sustaining Racial inequality and injustice. The Racial construction approach, for obvious reasons, is rather better at the latter task, but its insights 2 tend to come at the price of a broader understanding of the ways in which inequality is reproduced and justified, or of the ethical dilemmas raised by our competing claims to security. As we will see, insights from both approaches can be synthesized to clarify what, if anything, is wrong with Racial Profiling and what broader conclusions for equality and security follow from the study of Profiling.
-
race and Racial Profiling
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2015Co-Authors: Annabelle LeverAbstract:Philosophical reflection on Racial Profiling tends to take one of two forms. The first sees it as an example of ‘statistical discrimination,’ (SD), or when, if ever, probabilistic generalisations about group behaviour or characteristics can be used to judge particular individuals.(Applbaum 2014; Harcourt 2004; Hellman, 2014; Risse and Zeckhauser 2004; Risse 2007; Lippert-Rasmussen 2006; Lippert-Rasmussen 2007; Lippert-Rasmussen 2014). This approach treats Racial Profiling as one example amongst many others of a general problem in egalitarian political philosophy, occasioned by the fact that treating people as equals does not always require, or permit, us to treat them the same. The second form is concerned with how Racial Profiling illuminates the nature, justification, and reproduction of hierarchies of power and privilege based on skin colour and morphology. This form of reflection on Racial Profiling is therefore less about the justification for judging people based on the characteristics of the group to which they (appear to) belong, and more concerned with the specific ways in which the association of Racialised minorities – and, in particular, black people – with crime, contributes to, and reflects, Racial inequality, unfreedom, and oppression.(Kennedy 1998; Zack, 2015; Lever, 2005; Lever 2007). Both approaches to Profiling have much to recommend them and, taken together, they form an essential component of the political philosophy of race. The statistical approach has the merits of linking Racial Profiling, as practice, to a body of other practices that generate and justify inequalities based on factors other than race, but it typically offers little by way of insight into the role of Racial Profiling itself in sustaining Racial inequality and injustice. The Racial construction approach, for obvious reasons, is rather better at the latter task, but its insights tend to come at the price of a broader understanding of the ways in which inequality is reproduced and justified, or of the ethical dilemmas raised by our competing claims to security. As we will see, insights from both approaches can be synthesized to clarify what, if anything, is wrong with Racial Profiling and what broader conclusions for equality and security follow from the study of Profiling.
-
What's Wrong with Racial Profiling? Another Look at the Problem
2014Co-Authors: Annabelle LeverAbstract:According to Risse and Zeckhauser, Racial Profiling can be justified in a society, such as the contemporary United States, where the legacy of slavery and segregation is found in lesser but, nonetheless, troubling forms of Racial inequality. Racial Profiling, Risse and Zeckhauser recognize, is often marked by police abuse and the harassment of Racial minorities, and by the disproportionate use of race in Profiling. These, on their view, are unjustified. But, they contend, this does not mean that all forms of Racial Profiling are unjustified; nor, they claim, need one be indifferent to the harms of racism in order to justify Racial Profiling. In fact, one of the aims of their paper is to show that Racial Profiling, suitably understood, “is consistent with support for far-reaching measures to decrease Racial inequities and inequality” (134). Hence, one of their most striking claims, in an original and provocative paper, is that one can endorse Racial Profiling without being in any way indifferent to the disadvantaged status of Racial minorities. In an initial response to these claims, I argued that Risse and Zeckhauser tend to underestimate the harms of Racial Profiling. I suggested two main reasons why they did so. The first is that they tend to identify the more serious harms associated with Profiling with background racism, and therefore to believe that these are not properly attributable to Profiling itself. The second reason is that they ignore the ways in which background racism makes even relatively minor harms harder to bear and to justify than would otherwise be the case. Hence, I concluded, Racial Profiling cannot be a normal part of police practice in a society still struggling with racism, although under very special conditions, and with special regulation and compensation in place, it might be justified as an extraordinary police measure. I want to stand by those claims. However, Risse’s response to my arguments, here, persuades me that I misinterpreted his earlier position in one significant respect. So, I will start by explaining what interpretive mistake I believe that I made. I will then argue that despite Risse’s patient and careful response to my arguments, my initial concerns with his justification of Profiling remain valid.
-
Racial Profiling and Jury Trials
2009Co-Authors: Annabelle LeverAbstract:How should trial experts approach cases of Racial Profiling? As a British philosopher, albeit one who has lived and worked in the States, all I can offer are some suggestions and some questions to help readers make the most of their expertise. These are motivated by two concerns. First, from a British perspective, American jury selection is alien to our understanding of the ideal that people are tried by ‘a jury of their peers'. In particular, the American practice of selective strikes raises the worry that you cannot consistently ask jurors to evaluate the use of race-based expectations by police when the jury selection process, itself, is shaped by the idea that race is a good predictor of people's beliefs and behaviour. The second concern is an extension and generalisation of the first, and exemplifies the problems posed by Racial Profiling: what does it mean to treat people as equals in a world where people are disadvantaged because of their race? I will take these concerns in reverse order, briefly say something about them, and then suggest some approaches to Racial Profiling that, I hope, will be of practical, as well as theoretical, use.
-
What’s Wrong with Racial Profiling? Another Look at the Problem
Criminal Justice Ethics, 2007Co-Authors: Annabelle LeverAbstract:According to Mathias Risse and Richard Zeckhauser, Racial Profiling can be justified in a society, such as the contemporary United States, where the legacy of slavery and segregation is found in lesser but, nonetheless, troubling forms of Racial inequality. Racial Profiling, Risse and Zeckhauser recognize, is often marked by police abuse and the harassment of Racial minorities and by the disproportionate use of race in Profiling. These, on their view, are unjustified. But, they contend, this does not mean that all forms of Racial Profiling are unjustified; nor, they claim, need one be indifferent to the harms of racism in order to justify Racial Profiling. In fact, one of the aims of their paper is to show that Racial Profiling, suitably understood, “is consistent with support for far-reaching measures to decrease Racial inequities and inequality.”2 Hence, one of their most striking claims, in an original and provocative paper, is that one can endorse Racial Profiling without being in any way indifferent to the disadvantaged status of Racial minorities. [First paragraph]
Jack Mcdevitt - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Identifying and Measuring Racial Profiling by the Police
Sociology Compass, 2010Co-Authors: Amy Farrell, Jack McdevittAbstract:Over the past decade, public concern about Racial Profiling and Racially disparate treatment of drivers during routine traffic stops has become a critical issue facing law enforcement. Racial disparities in traffic stops, citations and searches impose serious costs on minority citizens and can strain relationships between community members and the police. Over the past decade, researchers, police administrators and legal advocates have employed various methodologies to measure whether or not, and under what conditions, Racial Profiling exists. Despite a proliferation of research on the subject, many questions about how to best measure Racial Profiling remain unanswered. This study provides an overview of the problem of Racial Profiling and discusses the strengths and limitations of the most common research strategies that have been used to identify and measure the prevalence of the problem.
Geoffrey P. Alpert - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A Contextual Study of Racial Profiling: Assessing the Theoretical Rationale for the Study of Racial Profiling at the Local Level
American Behavioral Scientist, 2004Co-Authors: Karen F. Parker, John M. Macdonald, Geoffrey P. Alpert, Michael R. Smith, Alex R. PiqueroAbstract:In this article, the authors argue for the importance of a contextualized examination of Racial Profiling. Although the study of Racial Profiling has only begun, existing studies have typically examined this phenomenon at the state level and based on total population information gathered from high-patrol agencies. The authors argue that Racial Profiling is best understood within the spatial context of local areas rather than large geographical areas. The purpose of this article is to explore some theoretical avenues to investigating Racial Profiling within the community context by linking Racial Profiling to theoretical perspectives that highlight community-level processes. That is, the authors apply theories such as social disorganization, urban disadvantage/deprivation, and Sampson’s community development and spatial diffusion arguments to the incident of Racial Profiling. The authors then illustrate the utility of exploring these linkages by providing information on crimes and structural dimensions in ...
-
Searching for direction: Courts, social science, and the adjudication of Racial Profiling claims
Justice Quarterly, 2002Co-Authors: Michael R. Smith, Geoffrey P. AlpertAbstract:As an issue of contemporary legal and social concern, Racial Profiling has become part of the national discourse. As claims of Racial Profiling proliferate, courts are struggling to adjudicate them without sound social science research on law enforcement stop practices. This article reviews the methodological and analytical weaknesses inherent in most of the research on Racial Profiling and illustrates how these weaknesses have caused problems for courts in deciding Racial Profiling claims. It also presents a methodological strategy for curing many of the defects in previous Racial Profiling studies, thereby providing courts with a sound basis for deciding equal protection-based claims that often rely on statistical evidence.
