The co-offender as counterfactual: a quasi-experimental within-partnership approach to the examination of the relationship between race and arrest
- 161 Downloads
Estimate the relationship between race and arrest within co-offending partnerships using a quasi-experimental framework. More specifically, this study argues that when two offenders commit an offense together (i.e., co-offend), the characteristics of the offense and victim are the same and can be removed as possible confounding variables. In this way, co-offenders can serve as counterfactual observations to one another, allowing for quasi-experimental analysis of the effects of race on arrest likelihood.
The current study restructures data from the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) into a multi-level format wherein level-1 information on offender demographics and arrest are nested within a level-2 file containing information on co-offending partnerships, offense characteristics, and victim characteristics. By restricting the data to co-offending partnerships and examining within-partnership differences in arrest, the analysis examines racial differences in arrest given that two offenders commit the same offense together against the exact same victim.
While a traditional logistic regression approach suggests that black offenders are less likely than white offenders to be arrested (OR = 0.749), the quasi-experimental analysis examining within-partnership differences suggests the opposite: black offenders are more likely than their white co-offending partners to be arrested for an offense (OR = 1.031).
These results have two implications. First, traditional regression analyses of the relationship between race and arrest may be subject to significant selection and omitted variable bias. Second, there is potential racial disparity in co-offender arrest: black co-offenders are more likely than their white partners to be arrested for the same violent offense.
KeywordsRace Arrest Co-offending Counterfactual Quasi-experiment NIBRS
The authors wish to thank Barry Ruback, Wayne Osgood, Holly Nguyen, Jeremy Staff, and Scott Gest for comments on this and earlier versions of this research.
This research was completed in part with funding from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (2015-R2-CX-K032). The views presented represent those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Bureau of Justice Statistics.
- Addington, L. A. (2015). Research adventures with “kinda big” data: using NIBRS to study crime. In M. D. Maltz & S. K. Rice (Eds.), Envisioning criminology: researchers on research as a process of discovery. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
- Beckett, K., & Sasson, T. (2004). The politics of injustice: crime and punishment in America. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
- Black, D. (1976). The behavior of law. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Black, D. (1980). The manners and customs of the police. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
- Chesney-Lind, M. (1978). Chivalry reexamined: women and the criminal justice system. In Bowker, L.H (ed.), Women, Crime, and the Criminal Justice System. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
- Cunningham, S. N., & Vandiver, D. M. (2018). Solo and multi-offenders who commit stranger kidnapping: an assessment of factors that correlate with violent events. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 33(2): 3459-3479.Google Scholar
- Durose, M., Smith, E., & Langan, P. (2007). Contact between police and the public (p. 2005). Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
- Erickson, M. L. (1973). Group violations, socioeconomic status, and official delinquency. Social Forces, 52, 41–52.Google Scholar
- Fagan, J., & Davies, G. (2000). Street stops and broken windows: Terry, race, and disorder in new York City. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 28, 457–504.Google Scholar
- Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
- Irwin, J. (1985). The jail: Managing the underclass in American society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Lantz, B. (2017). The consequences of crime in company: an analysis of co-offending group violence and arrest patterns in the NIBRS data, 2003–2012. Doctoral dissertation: The Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
- Lantz, B. (2018). The consequences of crime in company: co-offending, victim-offender relationship, and quality of violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence (online publication ahead of print).Google Scholar
- Lantz, B., Gladfelter, A., & Ruback, R. B. (2019). Stereotypical hate crimes and criminal justice processing: a multi-dataset comparison of bias crime arrest patterns by offender and victim race. Justice Quarterly, 36(2): 193-224.Google Scholar
- McGloin, J. M., & Nguyen, H. (2013). The importance of studying co-offending networks for criminological theory and policy. In Morselli, C. (ed.), Crime and Networks, 13–27. Abingdon, UK: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
- Pope, C. E., & Snyder, H. E. (2003). Race as a factor in juvenile arrests. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Officer of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Google Scholar
- Powell, D. D. (1990). A study of policy discretion in six southern cities. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 17, 1–7.Google Scholar
- Ramirez, D., McDevitt, J., & Farrell, A. (2000). A resource guide on racial profiling data collection: promising practices and lessons learned. Washington, D.C: Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
- Rosich, K. J. (2007). Race, ethnicity, and the criminal justice system. Washington, D.C.: American Sociological Association.Google Scholar
- Shannon, L. (1988). Criminal career continuity, it’s social context. New York: Human Sciences Press.Google Scholar
- Skogan, W. G., & Frydll, K. (2004). Fairness and effectiveness in policing: the evidence. Washington, D.C.: National Research Council.Google Scholar
- Snijders, T. A. B. (2005). Power and sample size in multilevel models. In B. S. Everitt & D. C. Howell (Eds.), Encylopedia of Statistics in Behavioral Science. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Weerman, F. M. (2014). Theories of co-offending. In Encyclopedia of criminology and criminal justice.Google Scholar
- Whitaker, G. P. (1982). What is patrol work? Police Studies, 4, 13–22.Google Scholar
- Withrow, B. (2006). Racial profiling: from rhetoric to reason. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.Google Scholar