Multiple discriminant analyses were performed to examine the sentencing recommendations of clinicians versus caseworkers for white, Mexican-American, and black male offenders, both before and after controlling for selected criminological characteristics of these ethnic groups. Though generally of small magnitude, discrimination effects favoring whites for relatively lenient case dispositions were larger for caseworkers than for clinicians and remained statistically significant only for caseworkers after holding constant criminological variables. The results are discussed in terms of the need for decreasing the discretion of decision makers through the use of guidelines that contain expected decision outcomes.
References
1.
Carter, R.M., & Wilkins, L.T.Some factors in sentencing policy. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, 1967, 58, 503-514.
2.
Cohen, L.E., & Kluegel, J.R.Determinants of juvenile court dispositions: ascriptive and achieved factors in two metropolitan courts. American Sociological Review, 1978, 43, 162-176.
3.
Cooley, W.W. & Lohnes, P.R.Multivariate data analysis. New York: John Wiley, 1971.
4.
Dickover, R.M., & Durkee, K.A.Guidance in sentencing: The presentence diagnostic observation program (Research Report No. 53). Sacramento: California Department of Corrections, 1974.
Green, E.Judicial attitudes in sentencing. London: Macmillan, 1961.
7.
Greenwood, P.W., Wildhorn, S., Poggio, E.C., Strumwasser, M.J., & DeLeon, P.Prosecution of adult felony defendants in Los Angeles County: A policy perspective (R-1127-DOJ). Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation, 1973.
8.
Hagan, J.Extra-legal attributes and criminal sentencing: an assessment of a sociological viewpoint. Law and Society Review, 1974, 8, 357-383.
9.
Hindelang, M.J.Race and involvement in common law personal crimes. American Sociological Review, 1978, 43, 93-109.
10.
Holland, T.R., & Holt, N.Offenders' characteristics versus decision-makers' attitudes as determinants of the outcome of presentence evaluations. Psychological Reports , 1976, 39, 267-274.
11.
Holland, T.R., & Holt, N.Utilization of offender case information by "lenient" versus "punitive" clinicians . Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1978, 34, 798-808.
12.
Huberty, C.A.Discriminant analysis. Review of Educational Research, 1975, 45, 543-598.
13.
Nie, N.H., Hull, C.H., Jenkins, J.G., Steinbrenner, K., & Bent, D.H.Statistical package for the social sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975.
14.
Rao, C.R.Advanced statistical methods in biometric research. New York: John Wiley, 1952.
15.
Slovic, P., Fischoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S.Behavioral decision theory. In M.R. Resenzweig & L.W. Porter (Eds.), Annual review of psychology (Vol. 28). Palo Alto, CA : Annual Reviews, Inc., 1977.
