A comparison of weighted and unweighted analyses in the national Crime Victimization Survey

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) data tapes include several variables of weights that reflect how many households or persons are represented by a given data record. While these sampling weights are crucial for estimating overall victimization rates, they do not have as much of an effect on methodological models, because weights in the NCVS are used primarily in ratio estimation adjustments and to compensate for a relatively low nonresponse rate. The general use of weights is discussed, and several examples are given that indicate that although there may be some differences in the coefficients, the basic conclusions drawn from the models are the same with or without weights. It is recommended that weighted analyses in the NCVS be used primarily as a tool in model development.     

If Violence Is Domestic, Does It Really Count?

Estimates of the prevalence of marital violence have been found to vary dramatically from survey to survey. This paper addresses one potential explanation for this difference which involves the focus and format of different surveys. We examine the extent to which survey respondents are willing to report marital violence in a context which focuses on criminal behaviors as opposed to a family violence context. In a very basic way, this answers a question as to whether individuals are willing to define acts of marital violence as criminal. Methodologically, it is a measurement issue which seriously affects the ability to compare findings across samples. National Youth Survey data are used to compare rates of generalized spousal assault and victimization reported in a crime context with rates of marital assault and victimization reported in a family violence context. Results indicate that 40 to 83% of all marital assaults and victimizations reported in the marital violence section are not reported in a format which focuses on criminal assault and victimization.     

Real jurors' understanding of the law in real cases

A survey of 224 Michigan citizens called for jury duty over a 2-month period was conducted to assess the jurors' comprehension of the law they had been given in the judges' instructions. Citizens who served as jurors were compared with a base line of those who were called for duty but not selected to serve, and with those who served on different kinds of cases. Consistent with previous studies of mock jurors, this study found that actual jurors understand fewer than half of the instructions they receive at trial. Subjects who received judges' instructions performed significantly better than uninstructed subjects on questions about the procedural law, but no better on questions about the substantive (criminal) law. Additionally, jurors who asked for help from the judge understood the instructions better than other jurors. Since the results replicate previous research using simulated trials, this study provides evidence for the generalizability of earlier work to actual trials.     

The juvenile death penalty and the Eighth Amendment

The present study investigated the Eighth Amendment tests of societal consensus and proportionality as applied to juvenile death penalties. A sample of former jurors (N=179) voted on whether to execute the defendant in a hypothetical case. Defendant's age (10, 15, 16, or 19) and level of remorse were varied. A large percentage of participants voted to execute the defendant in each condition, but the defendant's age and the participant's attitude toward juvenile culpability significantly predicted the likelihood of execution. Implications for the constitutionality of the juvenile death penalty and future research directions are discussed.