Gender Bias and Juvenile Justice Revisited: A Multiyear Analysis

By J. Macdonald, Meda Chesney‐Lind. 2001

167 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Education, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1c9ee51de5a67c873cb120e693940d68879d9be8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Education

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Effects of Individual and Contextual Characteristics on Preadjudication Detention of Juvenile Delinquents (2005, background): “A review of statewide juvenile court processing data from Hawaii revealed that gender had no effect on early decision-making processes (i.e., petition and adjudication) but found that girls were sanctioned more harshly than boys during the disposition phase (MacDonald & Chesney-Lind, 2001).”
Reconciling the Differences Between the “Gender-Responsive” and the “What Works” Literatures to Improve Services for Girls (2008, background): “Moreover, several studies have demonstrated that responses to girls’probation violations are more stringent than those experienced by boys (Beger & Hoffman, 1998; MacDonald & Chesney-Lind, 2001).”
Engendering the Evidence Base: A Critical Review of the Conceptual and Empirical Foundations of Gender-Responsive Interventions for Girls’ Delinquency (2013, background): “In addition, some studies find that girls systematically receive harsher punishments than boys for such status offenses, including those—such as running away—that can be linked directly to an abusive home life [39–41].”
A Meta-Analysis of Juvenile Justice Risk Assessment Instruments (2008, background): “…decision-making practices that influence entry into the juvenile justice system threatens to introduce sampling biases into all risk assessment research (Chesney-Lind & Sheldon, 1998; Gaarder, Rodriguez, & Zatz, 2004; Leiber & Mack, 2003; MacDonald & Chesney-Lind, 2001; McGuire & Kuhn, 2003).”
Restorative Justice at Work: Examining the Impact of Restorative Justice Resolutions on Juvenile Recidivism (2007, background): “Community-oriented responses to delinquency must address the gender differences that have been substantially documented in studies of juvenile justice processes (Chesney-Lind & Shelden, 1998; Horowitz & Pottieger, 1991; MacDonald & Chesney-Lind, 2001).”
Long-Term Patterns of Offending in Women (2010, background): “It is possible that this practice introduced a gender bias in the analysis of life-span convictions, if accused women were more likely than men to be found not guilty by a judge or to have their case waived for lack of evidence (Cauffman, 2008; MacDonald & Chesney-Lind, 2001).”
Predicting Adolescent and Adult Antisocial Behavior Among Adjudicated Delinquent Females (2008, background): “In fact, although more and more researchers are including both males and females in their samples, gender is all too often only a control variable in their analyses (Lanctôt & LeBlanc, 2002), with relatively few studies focusing specifically on female offending (MacDonald & Chesney-Lind, 2001).”