Residential location and mobility of registered sex offenders

97 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Collateral Damage: Family Members of Registered Sex Offenders (2009, background): “There was representation from all 50 states, though some states had a particularly high number of respondents: California (31), Florida (48), Michigan (64), and Texas (46).”
Collateral consequences of sex offender residence restrictions (2008, background): “Ostracization and underemployment seem to lead sex offenders to cluster in socially disorganized, economically depressed neighborhoods with limited resources to protect residents and to deter crime (Mustaine, Tewksbury, & Stengel, 2006 ; Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2006 ; Zevitz, 2004 , 2006 ).”
Sex Offender Residence Restrictions: Unintended Consequences and Community Reentry (2007, background): “Because sex offender policies can lead to ostracization and underemployment for sex offenders, many of them end up living in socially disorganized, economically depressed neighborhoods that have fewer resources for mobilizing community strategies to deter crime and protect residents ( Mustaine, Tewk”
Assessing the Impact of Sex Offender Registration and Community Notification On Sex-Offending Trajectories (2010, unknown): “…of family and social relationships, public shaming, and in some instances, violence (Levenson, 2008; Levenson & Cotter, 2005; Levenson, D’Amora, & Hern, 2007; Levenson & Tewksbury, 2009; Mustaine et al., 2006a, 2006b; Tewksbury, 2004, 2005; Tewksbury & Lees, 2006; Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2006, 2007).”