American Journal of Criminal Justice

, Volume 39, Issue 4, pp 681–697 | Cite as

An Examination of Defendant Sex Disparity in Capital Sentencing: A Propensity Score Matching Approach

  • Tara N. RichardsEmail author
  • M. Dwayne Smith
  • Wesley G. Jennings
  • Beth Bjerregaard
  • Sondra J. Fogel


Although much prior work has examined the influence of extralegal factors on jury capital sentencing decision-making, the influence of defendant sex has been largely omitted from previous investigations. Using propensity score matching methods, the current study analyzes data from the North Carolina Capital Sentencing Project to examine whether “sex matters” in capital sentencing. Findings demonstrated that prior to matching there was a significant difference in the likelihood of receiving the death penalty for female and male defendant cases; however, after matching cases on an array of legal and extralegal case characteristics, these differences were no longer significant. Further results revealed that male defendants’ cases included different aggravating and mitigating factors than female defendants’ cases and that female defendants had limited “paths” to capital trials. Findings suggest that any apparent sex effects that are observed in capital sentencing stem from real differences in the case characteristics found in female and male defendants’ cases rather than any direct effects of defendant sex on jury decision-making. Study limitations and implications for death penalty research are also discussed.


Death penalty Defendant sex Juror decision-making Propensity score matching 


  1. Baldus, D. C., & Woodworth, G. (2003). Race discrimination and the death penalty: an empirical and legal overview. In J. R. Acker, R. M. Bohm, & C. S. Lanier (Eds.), America’s experience with capital punishment (2nd ed., pp. 501–551). Durham: Carolina Academic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Baldus, D. C., Woodworth, G., & Pulaski, C., Jr. (1990). Equal justice and the death penalty: a legal and empirical analysis. Boston: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bjerregaard, B., Smith, M. D., Fogel, S. J., & Palacios, W. R. (2010). Alcohol and drug mitigation in capital murder trials: implications for sentencing decisions. Justice Quarterly, 27, 517–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Block, C. R., & Christakos, A. (1995). Intimate partner homicide in Chicago over 29 years. Crime & Delinquency, 41, 496–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bowers, J., Fredrickson, M., & Hansen, B. (2010). RItools: randomization inference tools. R package version, 2(15), 3.Google Scholar
  6. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  7. Cooper, A., & Smith, E. L. (2011). Homicide trends in the United States, 1980–2008: annual rates for 2009–2010. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
  8. Farr, K. A. (1997). Aggravating and differentiating factors in the cases of white and minority women on death row. Crime & Delinquency, 43, 260–278. Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Garvey, S. P. (1998). Aggravation and mitigation in capital cases: what do jurors think? Columbia Law Review, 98, 1538–1576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gauthier, D. K., & Bankston, W. B. (1997). Gender equality and the sex ration of intimate killing. Criminology, 35, 577–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gillespie, L. K., Loughran, T. A., Smith, M. D., Fogel, S. J., & Bjerregaard, B. (2013). Exploring the role of victim sex, victim conduct, and victim-defendant relationship in capital punishment sentencing. Homicide Studies, Published Online:. doi: 10.1177/1088767913485747.Google Scholar
  12. Gillespie, L. K., Smith, M. D., Bjerregaard, B., & Fogel, S. J. (2014). Examining the impact of proximate culpability mitigation in capital punishment sentencing recommendations: The influence of mental health mitigators. American Journal of Criminal Justice Google Scholar
  13. Greenfeld, L. A., & Snell, T. L. (1999). Women offenders. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Available at Scholar
  14. Gross, S. R., & Mauro, R. (1989). Death and discrimination: racial disparities in capital sentencing. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Hansen, B. B., & Bowers, J. (2008). Covariate balance in simple, stratified and clustered comparative studies. Statistical Science, 23, 219–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ho, D. E., Imai, K., King, G., & Stuart, E. A. (2007). Matching as nonparametric preprocessing for reducing model dependence in parametric causal inference. Political Analysis, 15, 199–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Holcomb, J. E., Williams, M. R., & Demuth, S. (2004). White female victims and death penalty disparity research. Justice Quarterly, 21, 877–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jennings, W.G., Richards, T., Smith, M.D., Bjerregaard, B., & Fogel, S. (forthcoming, 2014). A critical examination of the “White victim effect” and death penalty decision-making from a causal inference approach: The North Carolina experience. Journal of Criminal Justice Google Scholar
  19. Jennings, W. G., Richards, T. N., Tomisch, E. A., & Gover, A. R. (2013). A critical examination of the causal link between child abuse and adult dating violence perpetration and victimization from a propensity score matching approach. Women and Criminal Justice, 23, 167–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kavanaugh-Earl, J., Cochran, J. K., Smith, M. D., Fogel, S. J., & Bjerregaard, B. (2008). Racial bias and the death penalty. In J. Michael, E. Lynch, P. Britt, & K. K. Childs (Eds.), Racial Divide: Racial and Ethnic Biases in the Criminal Justice System (pp. 231–233). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
  21. Keil, T. J., & Vito, G. F. (1990). Race and the death penalty in Kentucky murder trials: an analysis of post-Gregg outcomes. Justice Quarterly, 7, 189–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lenza, M., Keys, D., & Guess, T. (2005). The prevailing injustices in application of the Missouri death penalty (1978 to 1996). Social Justice, 32(2), 151–165.Google Scholar
  23. Loughran, T. A., Mulvey, E. P., Schubert, C. A., Fagan, J., Piquero, A. R., & Losoya, S. H. (2009). Estimating a dose–response relationship between length of stay and future recidivism in serious juvenile offenders. Criminology, 47, 699–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. O’Brien, B., & Grosso, C. M. (2011). Confronting race: how a confluence of social movements convinced North Carolina to go where the McCleskey court wouldn’t. Michigan State Law Review, 2011, 463–504.Google Scholar
  25. Paternoster, R., & Brame, R. (2003). An empirical analysis of Maryland’s death sentencing system with respect to the influence of race and legal jurisdiction. Available at Scholar
  26. Paternoster, R., & Brame, R. (2008). Reassessing race disparities in Maryland capital cases. Criminology, 46, 971–1008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Phillips, S. (2009). Status disparities in the capital of capital punishment. Law & Society Review, 43, 807–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pierce, G. L., & Radelet, M. L. (2002). Race, region and death sentencing in Illinois. 1988–1997. Oregon Law Review, 81, 39–96.Google Scholar
  29. Poveda, T. G. (2009). The death penalty in the post-Furman era: a review of the issues and the debate. Sociology Compass, 3, 559–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Radelet, M. L., & Pierce, G. L. (1991). Choosing those who will die: race and the death penalty in Florida. Florida Law Review, 43, 1–34.Google Scholar
  31. Rapaport, E. (1991). The death penalty and gender discrimination. Law & Society Review, 25(2).Google Scholar
  32. Reza, E. M. (2005). Gender bias in North Carolina’s death penalty. Duke Journal of Gender Law& Policy, 12, 179–214.Google Scholar
  33. Richards, T. N., Jennings, W. G., Smith, M. D., Sellers, C., Fogel, S. J., & Bjerregaard, B. (2014). Explaining the “female victim effect” in capital punishment: An examination of victim sex specific models of juror decision-making. Crime & Delinquency. Advanced Online Publication. doi: 10.1177/0011128714530826.
  34. Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observation studies for casual effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sampson, R. J., Laub, R. J., & Wimer, C. (2006). Does marriage reduce crime? a counterfactual approach to within-individual causal effects. Criminology, 44, 465–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Starr, K., Hobart, M., & Fawcett, J. (2004). Findings and recommendations from the Washington State domestic violence fatality review. Seattle, WA: Washington State Coalition Against Domestic Violence. Available at Scholar
  37. Stauffer, A. R., Smith, M. D., Cochran, J. K., Fogel, S. J., & Bjerregaard, B. (2006). The interaction between victim race and gender on sentencing outcomes in capital murder trials. Homicide Studies, 10, 98–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Streib, V. L. (2005). Rare and inconsistent: the death penalty for women. Fordham Law Journal, 33(2), 101–132.Google Scholar
  39. Streib, V. L. (2013). Death penalty for female offenders, January 1, 1973 through December 31, 2012. Available at:
  40. Unah, I. (2011). Empirical analysis of race and the process of capital punishment in North Carolina. Michigan State Law Review, 2011, 610–658.Google Scholar
  41. Unah, I., & Boger, J. C. (2003). Race, politics, and the process of capital punishment in North Carolina. Available at
  42. Williams, M. R., Demuth, S., & Holcomb, J. E. (2007). Understanding the influence of victim gender in death penalty cases: the importance of victim race, sex-related victimization, and jury decision-making. Criminology, 45, 865–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Williams, M. R., & Holcomb, J. E. (2001). Racial disparity and death sentences in Ohio. Journal of Criminal Justice, 29, 207–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Williams, M. R., & Holcomb, J. E. (2004). The interactive effects of victim race and gender on death sentencing disparity findings. Homicide Studies, 8, 350–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Southern Criminal Justice Association 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tara N. Richards
    • 1
    Email author
  • M. Dwayne Smith
    • 2
  • Wesley G. Jennings
    • 2
  • Beth Bjerregaard
    • 3
  • Sondra J. Fogel
    • 4
  1. 1.University of BaltimoreSchool of Criminal JusticeBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Department of CriminologyUniversity of South FloridaTampaUSA
  3. 3.Department of Criminal Justice and CriminologyUniversity of North Carolina – CharlotteCharlotteUSA
  4. 4.University of South Florida School of Social WorkFloridaUSA

Personalised recommendations