Differential perceptions of the seriousness of male violence against female intimate partners among Jews and Arabs in Israel

Crime seriousness studies have consistently shown wide consensus regarding the high perceived seriousness of violent offenses. However, socio-cultural models suggest wide variability between social groups with regard to the seriousness of certain types of violent crime. This is particularly true in the case of male violence against female intimate partners. The present study examines these contradictory propositions in Israel focusing on its two main ethnic groups--Jews and Arabs. In an attitudinal survey, respondents were required to evaluate the seriousness of hypothetical crime scenarios representing a number of criminal offenses including male violence against female intimate partners. As expected, the findings revealed significantly more permissive attitudes to male violence against female intimate partners among Arab respondents than among Jews. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

Violent Street Crime Versus Harmful White-Collar Crime: A Comparison of Perceived Seriousness and Punitiveness

Recent studies have challenged traditional wisdom regarding public apathy about white-collar crime by revealing equal or greater perceived seriousness of these offenses among respondents relative to traditional crime. Nevertheless, subjects in those studies were generally asked to contrast white-collar crime scenarios with a non-violent street crime baseline vignette. Perhaps a violent street crime would have invited lower perceived seriousness for the white-collar offenses. Participants in the present study were asked to (1) read vignettes describing violent street crimes and physically harmful white-collar crimes, (2) compare their seriousness, and (3) determine appropriate sanctions. Subjects perceived the violent crime scenarios presented to them to be more serious than the harmful white-collar crime vignettes. Further, they were less punitive toward white-collar offenders compared with street criminals. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

The Perceived Seriousness of Crime in the Middle East

This paper builds on previous work in examining the seriousness of criminal acts. The research was conducted to determine the seriousness of several criminal acts in the Middle East with the goal to determine whether certain characteristics of the respondents would be associated with different perceptions as to the seriousness of different types of crimes. The findings of this study differ significantly from previous research in finding Moral Crimes to be perceived as extremely serious, in fact, about as serious as violent acts. However, the rank order of violent, property and white collar crimes, when the moral crimes are eliminated, are consistently with previous research. Similar to previous research, no difference was found in the overall ranking of crimes by any of the subgroups analyzed. It was found that religiosity (Islamic Fundamentalism) was the best predictor of a respondent's overall perception as to the seriousness of crime.     

Appropriately Upset? Emotion Norms and Perceptions of Crime Victims

Victims who express less emotion in response to a crime are perceived as less deserving, less sympathetic, and they have less punishment assigned to the offender who committed the crime. This study considers the extent to which emotion norms underlie perceptions of victims who testify. Two studies investigate the circumstances in which emotional reactions to a crime are seen as "unusual" and whether a more general emotion norm underlies responses to victim testimony. We test a "victim-role" norm against a "proportionality" norm by crossing the severity of victim's emotional response (severe or mild) with the seriousness of a crime (serious or less serious). Results across two studies lend greater support to the notion that people expect victims to match the intensity of their emotional response to the seriousness of the event (i.e., a proportionality rule), although we also find instances in which expectations of the victim are not strong. Gender of the victim exhibited small and contingent effects. We discuss the relevance of emotion norms to legal settings.     

Predicting crime story salience: A replication

This study examined the presentation of crime stories in the media, and filled three gaps within the large body of research in this area: First, it examined the presentation of crime news in different sized cities with significantly different crime rates. Second, it examined not only the content of crime stories, but importantly addressed what factors explain the prominence of crime stories. Third, it demonstrated the importance of using multivariate statistical techniques in conjunction with content analysis. Consistent with previous research in this area, the study found that journalistic decision-making on crime news was influenced primarily by the seriousness of the offense. In addition, the occupation of the defendant was also important. This study also showed, however, that there was considerable variation depending on the size of city. Specifically, the seriousness of a crime event had a limited impact in cities with lower crime rates. Implications for media studies are discussed.     

SERIOUSNESS OF OFFENSES

This experimental study, which was partly a replication of two previous studies in Canada and the United States, had a group of Norwegian students judge the seriousness of a set of offenses based on the magnitude estimation technique of psychophysics. Although it appeared that a considerable degree of consensus regarding the rank ordering of offense seriousness extended across the social and cultural differences between the three subject populations, some clear differences did emerge. In general, any change in the judgment of offense seriousness by the Norwegian subjects exceeded the corresponding changes perceived by the Canadian and the U.S. subjects.     

Severity of penalty,seriousness of the charge,and mock jurors' verdicts

It has been suggested that jurors in criminal trials are less likely to convict when the penalty is more severe or the charge is more serious. This was explained by Kerr (1975) in terms of a perceived increase in the cost of a Type I error (convicting an innocent person) that resulted in a criterion shift in the amount of evidence jurors required to vote guilty. The previous research found only weak support for the prediction regarding severity but consistent support for the predicted effect of seriousness. However, in the case materials used in these studies, more evidence was legally required to prove guilt on the more serious charges. This article presents studies in which the amount of evidence needed to prove guilt was equated for all charges. Under these circumstances, there was no effect on verdicts of seriousness of charge or severity of penalty and no evidence of a criterion shift due to either variable. There may still be reason to believe that these factors affect real juries, but this belief is not supported by the systematic evidence from mock jury studies.     

The Seriousness of Crime Cross-Culturally:

This study examines the perceptions of the seriousness of offenses: first, by examining perceptions of a wide range of offenses for respondents from two very divergent cultures, the United States and the Middle East, second, by assessing the perceived severity of some 17 sanctions for respondents from these two cultures and finally, by assessing the impact of religiosity on the perceived seriousness of Crime. In addition, both the magnitude estimation and category techniques for measuring the seriousness of crime are utilized and the results from using these two techniques are compared.     

Measuring crime seriousness perceptions: What have we learned and what else do we want to know

Perceptions of crime seriousness have been studied since the 1960s. Based predominantly on data from surveys, researchers have identified characteristics of acts affecting seriousness perceptions and have examined the degree of consensus in perceived seriousness for a variety of deviant and criminal behaviors. Methodological issues (methods of measurement, questionnaire structure and content, level or measurement, etc.) have been discussed at length. This review presents the most important substantive and methodological accomplishments and challenges of this body of research. It also discusses possible future directions, including the establishment of connections to sociological theory and normative philosophy.     

Predicting perceptions of crime seriousness among Native American Indians: a research note

Strongly held cultural values may lead to development of pro-social behaviors and subsequently values against committing crime among people belonging to targeted racial or ethnic groups. In this study, the author examines measures of Native American Indian cultural values and measures of collective efficacy to determine which set of values best predict perceptions of crime seriousness from within a population of Native American Indians. The author uses data collected from 312 Indians and 355 non-Indians during the Southern Ute Indian Community Safety Survey to determine which set of values are more closely aligned with perceptions of crime seriousness. This study found that those who held stronger Native American Indian cultural values also had stronger perceptions of crime seriousness. In the past, little scientific work has been done to associate specific cultural values to those held by cultural groups other than Euro-Americans. Findings from this work suggest that strengthening cultural values specific to a targeted group may be a promising method in the effort to reduce victimization among minority group members if said members view crime as serious and report it as such.     

CITIZEN CRIME STEREOTYPES—NORMATIVE CONSENSUS REVISITED

This paper examines the extent of agreement about complex perceptions of crime—crime stereotypes. The literature addresses crime seriousness. Crime perception is a complex phenomenon including much more than judged seriousness. Crime stereotypes are shown to be coherently organized around a few basic perceptions such as level of violence, amount of property harm, level of sex relatedness, and perhaps a few others. While the data affirm that there is agreement about judged seriousness, it suggests significant disagreement regarding crime stereotypes. Different people adopt different crime stereotypes. These differences are related to social variables. The most important theoretical conclusion is that agreement about any single crime perception, including seriousness, does not imply agreement about other features.     

Mexican American Attitudes Towards Crime

Abstract

The study seeks to determine (1) whether the crime seriousness ranking hierarchy identified by Rossi et al. in 1974 persists and (2) whether intra-group agreement on the relative ordering of crimes exists within a Mexican American sample stratified by age and sex. A self-administered survey questionnaire surveyed a sample of 525 college students and 426 parents. Respondents were asked to rank 20 crime offenses according to perceived seriousness. The analyses indicate that the older cohort of respondents is more conservative than the college students and that female students have lower tolerance for crime than their male counterparts. Among Mexican Americans, significant generational and sex differences exist in how serious certain behaviors are perceived.     

White-collar and organized crimes: Questions of seriousness and policy

The line between organized crime and white-collar crime is often vague, compounding the separate social problems represented by these two types of criminality. This blurring is complicated further by the general assumption that organized criminals pose a more serious threat, thus requiring a stronger sanction than white-collar criminals. The controversy surrounding certain recent crime-control statutes centers around different assessments of the seriousness of both types of criminality. Prior studies of crime seriousness have focused primarily on crimes in general, with some attention to white-collar crime in contrast to ordinary crime. To date, however, no one has examined the differences in perceptions of seriousness between white-collar and organized crime. This paper investigates how occupation and attitudes toward the seriousness of white-collar and organized crime influence attitudes toward policy distinctions between the two, as well as toward the usefulness of various definitions of organized crime.     

SOME NEW EVIDENCE ON THE SERIOUSNESS OF CRIME*

Previous studies of the seriousness of crime have attempted to elicit information from public surveys. This paper reports on an alternative method of ranking the severity of crime. Actual victim injury rates are combined with jury awards in personal injury accident cases to estimate pain, suffering, and fear. Crime-related death rates are combined with estimates of the value of life to arrive at monetary values for the risk of death. These estimates are combined with out-of-pocket costs (such as medical costs and lost wages) to arrive at total dollar estimates of the cost of individual crimes to victims. These dollar estimates are then used to rank the seriousness of crimes. Although these two approaches yield surprisingly similar rankings, the monetary estimates indicate that violent crimes are relatively more costly to victims than survey results might imply.     

CRIME AS HAZARD: PERCEPTIONS OF RISK AND SERIOUSNESS*

The study of crime suffers from an inattention to the social consequences of criminal acts. Conceiving crimes within the larger context of “hazard,” data are reported on the relative seriousness of conventional and white-collar crimes, as well as other hazards, using a sample of Washington state respondents. The results indicate that there is an inverse relationship between the perceived likelihood of a hazard and its seriousness. Generally, the more immediate the threat of a hazard, such as white-collar crimes, the more serious it is perceived to be. There are also implications from these consequences for perceptions of institutional effectiveness and interpersonal relationships. This suggests that future studies of the consequences of criminality, especially white-collar and corporate violations, might be directed toward the notions of risk and, eventually, social trust.     

Perceptions of crime seriousness in eight African-American communities: The influence of individual,environmental, and crime-based factors

Using secondary data analysis, we examine the perceptions of crime seriousness among 621 African-Americans living in eight urban neighborhoods stratified by crime rate and income level. On the basis of the literature exploring perception formation and attitudes toward crime seriousness, we hypothesize that individual-level variables, community-level variables, experiential variables, and the motive for the crime will influence respondents' perceptions of crime seriousness. The results of six multiple regression models suggest that gender, age, community crime rate, city of residence, religiosity, and fear of crime significantly influence respondents' view of crime. We challenge the assumption that there is considerable consensus regarding perceptions of crime seriousness, and discuss the implications for the justice system.     

The Consequences of Knowledge about Elite Deviance

The present study sought to understand the consequences of knowledge about elite deviance. Four hundred and eight participants completed an online questionnaire that measured (1) their level of knowledge about white-collar crime and (2) their perceived seriousness of, and punitiveness toward, it. Results of statistical analyses suggest a positive relationship between knowledge and punitive sentiments toward crimes of the powerful. Conversely, less knowledgeable subjects, comprised disproportionately of men, politically Conservatives, Republicans, and conservative Protestants were often more lenient toward elite offenders, both in terms of perceived seriousness of the offenses and punitiveness toward them, when compared with street crime. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

Reporting to the police in western nations: A theoretical analysis of the effects of social context

One of the most consistent findings in empirical studies using victimization data is that the decision to report victimization to the police is determined in large part by the seriousness of the crime. The police will be notified more often of crimes that involve more serious injury or greater monetary loss. These findings, however, may be due to the fact that most studies on reporting have been conducted using victimization surveys that devote a great deal of attention to the crime event and victim characteristics and much less to the social context of that event. As a result, influences on reporting operating at the neighborhood, jurisdiction, or nation level have been neglected. The aim of this paper is to bring social context into the discourse on reporting to the police by presenting a much more inclusive model of crime reporting. In addition, the influence of four aspects of macro-level social context on reporting are tested—the perceived competence of the police, institutionalization of insurance business, norm of conformity, and level of individualism—by merging incident-level data from the International Crime Victims Survey (ICVS) for 16 Western industrialized countries with nation-level data from various sources. Hierarchical logistic modeling is used to analyze the nested data. The perceived competence of the police has a positive effect on whether property crimes are reported.     

WHAT IS THE PERCEIVED SERIOUSNESS OF CRIMES?

Although criminologists have measured the perceived seriousness of offenses for decades, there is no consensus on the meaning of seriousness, nor is there clear evidence as to what individuals have in mind when they rate the seriousness of crimes. Seriousness judgments could reflect normative evaluations of offenses (i.e., their wrongfulness) or factual judgments about their harmfulness to victims. Survey data from Dallas residents show that the two dimensions are distinct and that conventional classes of crime (personal, property, public order) systematically differ on the two dimensions. Where crimes are perceived to be more wrong than harmful, seriousness mirrors wrongfulness. Where crimes are perceived to be more harmful than wrong, harmfulness predominates. A substantial minority of respondents, however, did not perceive differences in the moral gravity of crimes, judging the seriousness of crimes solely on the basis of harmfulness. These and other findings indicate that seriousness judgments are more structured and complex than commonly supposed and that conventional measures of seriousness, when applied to substantive problems, may mask or obscure distinct mechanisms of evaluation.