Race and sentencing: A meta-analysis of conflicting empirical research results

This paper employs meta-analytic methodology to evaluate the research results of a number of separate race and sentencing studies in the context of three competing theoretical frameworks (the differential involvement, direct-impact, and interactionist perspectives), and the empirical evidence supporting each. The data indicate that although the effect size of race on sentencing is not statistically significant at this level of aggregation, its relationship to sentencing is significantly conditioned by the measurement techniques employed by researchers. Specifically, this study shows that certain methods of classifying racial groups may mask the true effect of race on sentencing decisions. The implications of this finding for future research are discussed.