No description available.

No description available.

We outline four connections between xenophobia and punitiveness toward criminals in a national sample of Americans. First, among self-identified whites xenophobia is more predictive of punitiveness than specific forms of racial animus. Second, xenophobia and punitiveness are strongly connected among whites, but are only moderately and weakly related among black and Hispanic Americans, respectively. Third, among whites substantial proportions of the variance between sociodemographic, political, and religious predictors of punitiveness are mediated by levels of xenophobia. Finally, xenophobia is the strongest overall predictor of punitiveness among whites. Overall, xenophobia is an essential aspect of understanding public punitiveness, particularly among whites.

This thesis traces the contours of the Black-White color line in modern America by illuminating how Whites' racialized political behavior varies across local geographic contexts. In a critical reinterpretation of the racial threat hypothesis, I argue that local geography conditions the relationship between Whites' racial orientations and their preferences on policies related to race - but not because Whites are passively threatened in proximity to a Black population. Rather, Whites are active, subjective perceivers of their surroundings who have an interest in maintaining their racial privilege. This conceptual shift not only challenges the assumed neutrality of Whites' vision; it also enables me to identify the range of contextual indicators that Whites might construe as threatening, and the range of White attitudes that are activated as a result. My empirical evidence comes from three case studies. The first two use geocoded survey data to analyze White opinion on welfare spending in 2000, and on affirmative action between 2006 and 2010. The third study draws on in-depth interviews conducted in 2016, exploring an issue related to school desegregation in Louisiana. Each study affirms the core findings of the thesis: Whites' policy preferences are polarized according to racial orientations in settings where race is salient; and a shared White perspective is evident even across polarized attitudes. My findings offer hope, showing that a sign of threat to some Whites may activate racially tolerant behavior in others; as well as reason to restrain our optimism, challenging the assumption that affluent Blacks, unlike the 'undeserving' Black poor, will not be perceived as threatening by Whites. Ultimately, only by recognizing the color line's responsiveness to local geography - and its resilience even as White attitudes liberalize and Black class positions improve - can we understand the line's persistence or the possibility of one day dismantling it.

We outline four connections between xenophobia and punitiveness toward criminals in a national sample of Americans. First, among self-identified whites xenophobia is more predictive of punitiveness than specific forms of racial animus. Second, xenophobia and punitiveness are strongly connected among whites, but are only moderately and weakly related among black and Hispanic Americans, respectively. Third, among whites substantial proportions of the variance between sociodemographic, political, and religious predictors of punitiveness are mediated by levels of xenophobia. Finally, xenophobia is the strongest overall predictor of punitiveness among whites. Overall, xenophobia is an essential aspect of understanding public punitiveness, particularly among whites.

Master of Arts / Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work / L. Susan Williams / Building upon macrostructural “social threat” (Blalock, 1967) research, the current study develops a theoretical model of judicial decision-making processes that focuses upon racial threats perceived within individual court contexts and the corresponding effects on individual sentencing outcomes. This model recognizes that in the absence of a true-measure of a defendant’s threat to the community (likelihood to re-offend) judicial decision makers often rely upon stereotypical generalizations regarding offender populations to render decisions. Although actors develop biases and stereotypes through interactions with society in general, the most relevant knowledge affecting sentencing decisions is perceptions gained through the course of work. Similar to the influential “Pygmalion in the Classroom” study, biases and stereotypes regarding the criminality of groups of criminal defendants are pervasive in contemporary society, undoubtedly influencing sentencing outcomes. Therefore, the most meaningful measurement of threat, as it pertains to sentencing, is the contextual composition of court caseloads. Using data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics-State Court Processing Statistics (SCPS) program, this study examines court-contextual or caseload level threats and the interaction between courtroom context and individual offense/offender characteristics and the corresponding impact on sentencing outcomes. Findings demonstrate that courts of high minority defendant volume apply more punitive sanctions to (increased sentence length and odds of incarceration) to all defendants within this context, while black defendants receive the greatest sanctions. These findings support assertions regarding the impact of threatening populations within courtroom contexts.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.