Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Self-Reported Male-Female Differences in Criminal Involvement Do Not Account for Criminal Justice Processing Differences

  • Original Article
  • Published:
American Journal of Criminal Justice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Disparities between males and females in criminal behavior have been widely documented. Despite the extensive amount of research examining sex differences in criminal and analogous behaviors, there is no consensus on whether self-reported misbehavior accounts for the large sex differences found in all phases of the criminal justice system. The current study explores whether, and to what degree, self-reported misconduct accounts for male-female differences. To do so, data drawn from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health) were analyzed. Consistent with prior research, the results revealed statistically significant and substantively large male-female differences in being arrested, pleading guilty, being sentenced to probation, and being incarcerated. These disparities were unaffected by self-reports of lifetime violent behavior, lifetime non-violent behavior, low self-control, IQ, parental socialization, and social support.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Note that we reestimated all of the models with self-control scales developed from wave 2 and wave 3 and the pattern of results was identical to the ones generated with the wave 1 self-control scale. We opted to use the wave 1 self-control scale because it includes a broader range of items that use both parental reports and self-reports. All of the other self-control scales include a narrower list of items and are based only on self-reports.

  2. We opted to use the wave 2 delinquent peers scale to reduce the lag time between this predictor variable and the outcome measure (that includes data comprised from wave 4 reports). There was not a delinquent peers scale available at any of the subsequent waves so we selected the wave 2 scale to provide the best opportunity to account for variation in the outcome measure.

  3. Again, we selected the wave 2 scales to reduce the amount of time lag which, in turn, should account for more variation (and thus reduce the male-female gap) in the outcome measures.

  4. We tested for collinearity and multicollinearity in all of the models and the results did not indicate any harmful levels of collinearity/multicollinearity.

References

  • Archer, J. (2004). Sex differences in aggression in real-world settings: A meta-analytic review. Review of General Psychology, 8, 291–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, K. M. (2011a). Genetic influences on being processed through the criminal justice system: Results from a sample of adoptees. Biological Psychiatry, 69, 282–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, K. M. (2011b). The effects of genetics, the environment, and low self-control on perceived maternal and paternal socialization: Results from a longitudinal sample of twins. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 27, 85–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, K. M., Boutwell, B. B., & Barnes, J. C. (2014). Social support or biosocial support? A genetically informative analysis of social support and its relation to self-control. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 41, 453–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, K. M., DeLisi, M., Wright, J. P., Boutwell, B. B., Barnes, J. C., & Vaughn, M. G. (2013). No evidence of racial discrimination in criminal justice processing: Results from the National Longitudinal Study of adolescent health. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 29–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, K. M., & Nedelec, J. L. (2015). A biosocial explanation for male-female differences in criminal involvement. In K. M. Beaver, B. B. Boutwell, & J. C. Barnes (Eds.), The nurture versus biosocial debate in criminology: On the origins of criminal behavior and criminality (pp. 25–42). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Björkqvist, K. (2018). Gender differences in aggression. Current Opinion in Psychology, 19, 39–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1988). Homicide. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, L., Beaver, K., & Wright, J. (2009). Handbook of crime correlates. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goulette, N., Wooldredge, J., Frank, J., & Travis, L. (2015). From initial appearance to sentencing: Do female defendants experience disparate treatment? Journal of Criminal Justice, 43, 406–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K. M., Florey, F., Tabor, J., Bearman, P. S., Jones, J., & Udry, J. R. (2003). The National Longitudinal Study of adolescent health: Research design. Available from http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/design. Accessed 15 November 2018

  • Harvey, L., Burnham, R. W., & Pease, K. (1992). Gender differences in criminal justice: An international comparison. British Journal of Criminology, 22, 208–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mead, M. (1928). Coming of age in Samoa: A psychological study of primitive youth for Western civilization. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mead, M. (1935). Sex and temperament in three primitive societies. New York, NY: Morrow.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mealey, L. (2000). Sex differences: Developmental and evolutionary strategies. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mustard, D. B. (2001). Racial, ethnic, and gender disparities in sentencing: Evidence from the U.S. federal courts. Journal of Law and Economics, 44, 285–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rehavi, M., & Starr, S. B. (2014). Racial disparities in federal criminal sentences. Journal of Political Economy, 122, 1320–1354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spohn, C., Gruhl, J., & Welch, S. (1987). The impact of the ethnicity and gender of defendants on the decision to reject or dismiss felony charges. Criminology, 25, 175–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stacey, A. M., & Spohn, C. (2006). Gender and the social costs of sentencing: An analysis of sentences imposed on male and female offenders in three U.S. district courts. Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law, 11, 43–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starr, S. B. (2015). Estimating gender disparities in federal criminal cases. American Law and Economics Review, 17, 127–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steffensmeier, D., Kramer, J., & Streifel, C. (1993). Gender and imprisonment decisions. Criminology, 31, 411–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart-Williams, S. (2018). The ape that understood the universe: How the mind and culture evolve. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

  • Udry, J. R. (2003). The National Longitudinal Study of adolescent health (add health), waves I and II, 1994–1996; wave III, 2001–2002 [machine-readable data file and documentation]. Chapel Hill, NC: Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, A. (2011). Feminist criminology through a biosocial lens. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, J. P., Tibbetts, S. G., & Daigle, L. E. (2008). Criminals in the making: Criminality across the life course. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yun, I., Cheong, J., & Walsh, A. (2011). Genetic and environmental influences in delinquent peer affiliation: From the peer network approach. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 9, 241–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research uses data from Add Health, a program project directed by Kathleen Mullan Harris and designed by J. Richard Udry, Peter S. Bearman, and Kathleen Mullan Harris at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and funded by grant P01-HD31921 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, with cooperative funding from 23 other federal agencies and foundations. Special acknowledgment is due Ronald R. Rindfuss and Barbara Entwisle for assistance in the original design. Information on how to obtain the Add Health data files is available on the Add Health website (http://www.cpc.unc.edu/addhealth). No direct support was received from grant P01-HD31921 for this analysis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, 32306-1127, USA

    Kevin M. Beaver

  2. Center for Social and Humanities Research, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

    Kevin M. Beaver & John Paul Wright

  3. School of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45221-0389, USA

    John Paul Wright

Authors
  1. Kevin M. Beaver
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John Paul Wright
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kevin M. Beaver.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Kevin Beaver delcares that he has no conflicts of interest.

John Wright declares that he has no conflicts of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Beaver, K.M., Wright, J.P. Self-Reported Male-Female Differences in Criminal Involvement Do Not Account for Criminal Justice Processing Differences. Am J Crim Just 44, 859–871 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-019-09488-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-019-09488-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation