CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 197Criminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisCriminal Justice and PenologyEducation Discipline and Inequality

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Race and disparities in sentencing: A test of the liberation hypothesis

Spohn, Cassia, Cederblom, Jerry·1991·Justice Quarterly
DOI 10.1080/07418829100091071
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper builds on Kalven and Zeisel's “liberation hypothesis” and explores the possibility that racial discrimination in sentencing is confined to less serious cases. We examined the sentences imposed on defendants convicted of violent felonies in Detroit. We found that defendant's race had a direct effect only on the decision to incarcerate but had indirect effects on both incarceration and sentence length. Further analysis revealed an interaction between the race of the defendant, the seriousness of the case, and the harshness of the sentence. Using a number of measures of the seriousness of the case, we found that race had a significant effect on incarceration only in less serious cases. Our findings provide dramatic support for the liberation hypothesis and highlight the importance of using an interactive rather than an additive model in sentencing research.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07418829100091071

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Baldus David C., 1985, U.C. Davis Law Review, 18, 1375
  2. Barnett Arnold, 1985, U.C. Davis Law Review, 18, 1327
  3. Bayley Christopher T., 1976, Judicature, 60, 229
  4. Bowers William J., 1980, Crime and Delinquency, 74, 1067
  5. Ervin S.J., 1971, Preventive Detention
  6. Goldkamp John, 1980, Justice System Journal, 5, 234
  7. 10.2307/2578081 · DOI
  8. 10.2307/2578906 · DOI
  9. Klepper Steven, 1983, Research on Sentencing: A Search for Reform, 2, 55
  10. Riedel Marc, 1976, Temple Law Quarterly, 49, 261
  11. Sutton L. Paul, 1978, Variations in Federal Criminal Sentences: A Statistical Assessment at the National Level

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 197

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Spohn, C., & Cederblom, J.
Affiliations
University of Nebraska at Omaha (US)
ORCID
Spohn, Cassia
Venue
Justice Quarterly
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
1991-09-01
Volume
8
Issue
3
Pages
305-327
ISSN
  • 0741-8825 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-9109
DOI
10.1080/07418829100091071
OpenAlex
W2013575550
Cited by
197
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 9
FWCI
1.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Justice Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education Discipline and Inequality
Keywords
sentence length, interactive model, Detroit

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review