Determinants of State Innovations in American Sentencing and Corrections Policy
| Author | Shannon M. Sliva |
| DOI | 10.1177/0887403414556645 |
| Date | 01 November 2016 |
| Published date | 01 November 2016 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2014
Article
Criminal Justice Policy Review
2016, Vol. 27(7) 702 –722
Determinants of
© 2014 SAGE Publications
Reprints and permissions:
State Innovations in
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0887403414556645
cjp.sagepub.com
American Sentencing
and Corrections Policy:
A Systematic Review
Shannon M. Sliva1
Abstract
Recently, government officials, policy makers, and practitioners are taking a closer
look at present day sentencing and corrections approaches. State policy decisions
have in large part determined how justice is administered, and a variety of contextual
factors determine which policies states are likely to adopt. This review synthesizes
the empirical literature on determinants of state sentencing and corrections policy
innovations and discusses their relative value in predicting state policy adoptions
across studies. Results indicate that sentencing and corrections policies are less
likely to be predicted by functional explanations such as crime rates than by certain
economic, political, and social variables. The most consistently predictive determinants
of state policy adoptions are the external influences of other states and the federal
government.
Keywords
justice, correctional policy, sentencing policy, criminal justice policy
Extensive research across the social sciences seeks to explain and predict the process
of public policy formation in the American states. Numerous studies identify variables
which influence the policy-making process, either directly or indirectly. Researchers
suggest that policy innovation at the state level varies widely, not only according to the
environment but also along with the nature and type of policy under consideration
1University of Texas Arlington, USA
Corresponding Author:
Shannon M. Sliva, University of Texas at Arlington, 211 S. Cooper Street, Arlington, TX 76019, USA.
Email: shannon.graves@mavs.uta.edu
Sliva
703
(Gray, 1973; Makse & Volden, 2011; Nicholson-Crotty, 2009). Accordingly, a distinct
focus has developed to explore the unique determinants of criminal justice policies,
with even more specific explorations of policies directed at prosecution and defense,
court reform, juvenile justice, criminalization, sentencing, and corrections (Bergin,
2011; Karch, 2007).
In recent decades, extensive changes in sentencing and corrections policies have
provided fertile ground for targeted exploration of the unique determinants of these
policies as researchers work to understand the complex forces underlying the rise and
fall of mandatory sentencing guidelines, the privatization of prisons, and the evolution
of innovative alternatives to traditional ways of responding to crime. This work has
special relevance to criminal justice professionals and social workers as we seek to
understand the social currents guiding the administration of justice and to intervene on
behalf of marginalized and vulnerable populations, including offenders, victims, and
victimized communities, through policy practice. In hopes of adding to this necessary
understanding, this article synthesizes the empirical literature on factors influencing
state legislation governing sentencing and corrections policies, identifies gaps in the
literature, and suggests areas of focus for future practice and research.
Background
The earliest efforts to understand the determinants of state public policy adoption and
diffusion offered competing views about the relative importance of functional, eco-
nomic, political, and social factors and the relationship between them (Dawson &
Robinson, 1963; Fenton & Chamberlayne, 1969; Walker, 1969). Walker’s (1969)
study is considered by many to be the seminal study on policy diffusion or the spread
of policies from one jurisdiction to another. A barrage of studies followed, each offer-
ing a unique model for the prediction of state policy innovations (see F. S. Berry &
Berry, 2007; Nice, 1994). While Walker (1969) aggregated a multitude of policies and
policy types, Gray (1973) advocated for the separate consideration of narrow policy
areas, finding differential support for determinants of 12 individual welfare policies. F.
S. Berry and Berry (2007) estimated that more than 40 studies were published on
policy innovation and diffusion between 1990 and 2005 alone. Over time, the initial
view of policy as a predictable response to problems gave way to more politicized and
contextual hypotheses.
During the same time period that the literature on public policy formation was
developing, dramatic shifts were occurring in federal and state responses to crime.
Sentencing and corrections reforms were in the forefront of the discussion. Between
1972 and 2005, truth-in-sentencing laws, mandatory sentencing guidelines, three
strikes laws, and movements toward prison privatization contributed to a 636%
increase in the incarcerated population (King, Mauer, & Young, 2005). Anecdotal
accounts abounded, ascribing sentencing and corrections policies to federal ideology
and incentivizing (Harris, 1972), media hyping (Beale, 2006; Caldwell & Caldwell,
2011), shifts in public opinion (Shichor & Sechrest, 1996), and myriad other causes.
Yet criminal justice and public policy researchers struggled to empirically understand
704
Criminal Justice Policy Review 27(7)
the unique determinants of criminal justice policies within the framework of previ-
ously advanced ideas about the general study of public policy. Over the decades, stud-
ies evaluated the effect of social, economic, and political determinants on policies
governing juvenile justice issues (Downs, 1976), rape laws (Berger, Neuman, &
Searles, 1991), hate crimes (Grattet, Jenness, & Curry, 1998), capital punishment
(Mooney & Lee, 2000), and due process standards (Worden & Davies, 2009), finding
varying and often inconsistent levels of support for hypothesized determinants.
Decades later, the literature continues to observe that research on criminal justice
policy formation is an underexplored area (Bergin, 2011; Ismaili, 2006). Ismaili (2006)
suggested that criminologists are too intent on discovering policy outcomes to contrib-
ute to an adequate understanding of policy determinants and that political scientists
overlook the criminal justice field as an area for targeted exploration. Regardless of
the cause, there is work yet to be done toward developing a fuller picture of criminal
justice policy formation, its relationship to the larger field of public policy research,
and its many highly contextualized sub-fields.
The purpose of this article is to discern a starting point for the further understanding
of sentencing and corrections policy formation by conducting a systematic review of
the empirical literature on this topic. After a description of methodology for this
review, findings from identified studies are discussed within the context of relevant
theories of public policy formation most frequently offered to explain the adoption of
criminal justice policies. Afterward, gaps in the literature and areas for future research
are identified.
Method
Databases and Search Terms
An exhaustive review of the empirical literature identifying social, political, and eco-
nomic determinants of sentencing and corrections policy was conducted through a
rigorous search strategy which included a comprehensive array of search engines and
databases, carefully selected search terms, and well-defined inclusion criteria. Search
engines including ProQuest, EBSCOHost, and Google Scholar were used to access
multidisciplinary databases as well as databases representing the fields of political sci-
ence, economics, sociology, psychology, and social work. Databases explored included
Academic Search Complete, Criminal Justice Abstracts, EconLit, JSTOR, ProQuest
Criminal Justice, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, Psychology and Behavioral
Sciences Collection, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, Public Affairs Information Service
(PAIS) International, Social Services Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Social Work
Abstracts, and Worldwide Political Science Abstracts. In addition, the Don M.
Gottfredson Library of Criminal Justice Grey Literature Database was used to search
the gray literature on criminal justice policy.
Initial broad search terms included any of the keywords criminal justice, sentenc-
ing, or corrections paired with either of the keywords policy (or policies) or legisla-
tion. These searches result in an unmanageable number of titles, but review of some of
Sliva
705
the most relevant abstracts prompted a second, more targeted search of all selected
databases, this time including the original search terms along with any of the keywords
innovation, diffusion, adoption, or influenc* and the keyword state (or states). From
all databases, 978 titles were returned. Based on the relevance of titles, 146 abstracts
were reviewed for inclusion in the study, and seven articles were selected for the study
based on inclusion criteria. In addition to strategic search of the literature through topi-
cal databases, studies were identified for this review by tracing the references of other
relevant studies, theoretical pieces, and one particularly salient literature review
(Bergin, 2011). This process resulted in the addition of three more empirical articles to
the study sample.
Inclusion Criteria
Abstracts returned by searches were carefully reviewed for a possible...
To continue reading
Request your trial