Public Opinion on the Use of Consumer Racial Profiling to Identify Shoplifters: An Exploratory Study

• Author: Shaun L. Gabbidon,George E. Higgins
• DOI: 10.1177/0734016811399420
• Published date: 01 June 2011
• Date: 01 June 2011
• Subject Matter: Articles

Criminal Justice Review
36(2) 201-212
Public Opinion on the Use of
ª 2011 Georgia State University
Reprints and permission:
Consumer Racial Profiling to
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0734016811399420
http://cjr.sagepub.com
Identify Shoplifters: An
Exploratory Study
Shaun L. Gabbidon1 and George E. Higgins2
Abstract
Based on a recent state-level poll of Pennsylvania residents (N ¼ 852), this paper extended previous
public opinion research on consumer racial profiling (CRP) by exploring whether the views of Penn-
sylvanians on CRP were influenced by ethical concerns, the belief that the practice was discrimina-
tory, and the perceived effectiveness of the practice. Support was found that views regarding the
perception that CRP was discriminatory increased the likelihood that respondents felt CRP occurs.
Similarly, those respondents who perceived that CRP was effective were also more likely to believe
that it occurs. Ethical considerations reduced the likelihood of support for CRP while perceived
effectiveness increased the support for CRP. The authors argue that scholars should work through
the media and civil rights organizations to publicize the empirical research that clearly shows that
CRP does exist and that it is not effective.
Keywords
racial profiling, consumer racial profiling, public opinion, ethics discrimination, effectiveness
Introduction
Few scholars would argue that, since the 1990s, racial profiling has emerged as a major emphasis
among criminologists. Consequently, the literature is now abundant with scholarship on the nature
and extent of profiling. The caveat here, though, is that much of the literature has centered on one
aspect of profiling—traffic stops. This almost singular focus on traffic stops has limited the body of
scholarship on racial profiling in other contexts such as in airports and retail establishments. Even so,
there is emerging research in these other areas. Within the racial profiling scholarship, there has been
a body of public opinion scholarship that has investigated how citizens view profiling (Jordan,
Gabbidon, & Higgins, 2009; Weitzer & Tuch, 2002, 2005). In general, this literature has sought
to determine whether the public is supportive of such policing practices and, if so, what factors are
1School of Public Affairs, Penn State Harrisburg, Middletown, PA, USA
2Department of Justice Administration, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA
Corresponding Author:
Shaun L. Gabbidon, School of Public Affairs, Penn State Harrisburg, 777 W. Harrisburg Pike, Middletown, PA 17057, USA
Email: slg13@psu.edu

---

202
Criminal Justice Review 36(2)
indicative of support (Higgins, Gabbidon, & Vito, 2010; Weitzer & Tuch, 2006). This literature has
generally excluded one critical focus—the reasons why citizens either support or do not support
profiling.
With retailers losing billions of dollars each year to shoplifting (Hollinger & Adams, 2009),
numerous measures have been tried in an effort to reduce losses. Most citizens are aware of the use
of preventive measures such as CCTV, merchandise alarms, fitting room attendants, and uniform
guards. However, in recent years, it has been alleged in litigation that racial/ethnic profiling repre-
sents another preventive tactic that has been used by well-known retailers such as Wal-Mart JCPen-
ney, Dillard’s, and Cracker Barrel, among others (Gabbidon, 2003; Harris, 2003). This is despite the
fact that research has shown no difference in shoplifting trends by race/ethnicity (Dabney, Hollinger,
& Dugan, 2004). Nonetheless, some citizens and retailers alike continue to support such practices.
The present study delved into this unexplored aspect of public opinion on racial profiling. More-
over, this research also represents a divergence from previous literature in that it investigated public
opinion on consumer racial profiling (CRP) or the use of race/ethnicity to profile customers as sus-
pected shoplifters in retail settings. To understand this support among citizens, this study investi-
gated whether factors such as perceived effectiveness, ethical concerns, or the belief that CRP is
discriminatory influences the perceived existence of the practice and the level of support for the
practice. We begin with a review of the scholarly literature on CRP.
Literature Review
Much of the early literature on CRP explored case studies of instances in which retailers were
found to be providing poor service to racial/ethnic minorities (Adamson, 2000; Crockett, Grier,
& Williams, 2003; Fifield, 2001; Harris, 2003; Henderson, 2001; Lee, 2000; O’Connell, 2001;
Williams, Henderson, & Harris, 2001). This literature was largely descriptive or interview-based and
did not emphasize the aspect of CRP in which racial/ethnic groups are targeted as suspected thieves.
Two exceptions to this early scholarship were the works of Feagin (1991) and Asquith and Bristow
(2000). Feagin’s interview-based study on the experiences of Black middle-class citizens in public
places found that Blacks felt they were targeted for ‘‘excessive surveillance.’’ Asquith and Bristow
found that students viewed racial/ethnic minorities as the ones most likely to shoplift both before and
after they were exposed to an experimental stimulus in the form of a video highlighting actual demo-
graphics of shoplifters.
Few additional empirical studies on CRP appeared again until the mid-2000s. During this period,
scholars turned to litigation from the state and federal levels as a way to determine the nature of CRP
incidents. The legal cases represent litigation pursued by racial/ethnic minorities who felt they had
been profiled in a retail setting. These empirical analyses of cases pointed to the fact that sales clerks,
as opposed to security personnel, were the ones most likely to be accused of CRP. The litigation also
found that many of the false arrests were caused because clerks or security personnel acted on unsub-
stantiated hunches. Finally, in nearly 60% of the cases, the plaintiffs were victorious (Gabbidon,
2003). Using similar methods, other researchers also found that discrimination (both subtle and
overt) in general and CRP in particular was occurring in retail settings (Harris, Henderson, &
Williams, 2005; Williams, Harris, & Henderson, 2006).
More recent research has continued to explore the nature and extent of CRP. Gabbidon and
Higgins (2007) conducted a victimization survey of 500 randomly selected Philadelphia area resi-
dents to find out how frequently they perceived themselves as having been targeted by retailers
as suspected shoplifters. Though less than half of the sample reported experiencing CRP (43%),
Blacks were 10 times more likely than Whites to report having experienced CRP (Gabbidon &
Higgins, 2007). The results also noted that Blacks and Whites who encountered CRP expressed neg-
ative emotions as a direct result of the incident (Gabbidon & Higgins, 2008; Higgins & Gabbidon,

---

Gabbidon and Higgins
203
2009). A similar victimization study on the CRP experiences of several hundred students at several
historically Black universities found nearly identical results to the Philadelphia research (Gabbidon,
Craig, Okafo, Marzette, & Peterson, 2008). It is notable that in both studies, those respondents who
experienced CRP rarely reported the incident to officials at the store, still made a purchase at the
store, and often later returned to the store.
Researchers have conducted experimental research to determine the nature and extent of CRP.
Dabney et al. (2004) examined the question, ‘‘Who actually steals?’’ Their research was con-
ducted in an Atlanta drugstore where they were granted permission to study the racial/ethnic
trends in shoplifting. To do so, the researchers used trained observers to determine the percentage
of each racial/ethnic group that shoplifted. The researchers found no significant differences
between the levels of stealing by race/ethnicity. These findings give additional credence to the
notion that behavioral cues (looking around for clerks, examining security measures, and tamper-
ing with merchandise) are likely to be much more effective in identifying shoplifters. An unex-
pected finding from the research, though, was that even trained observers of all racial/ethnic
groups still held an unconscious bias toward racial/ethnic minorities (Dabney, Dugan, Topalli,
& Hollinger, 2006).
Schreer, Smith, and Thomas (2009) recently conducted another experimental study to investigate
CRP. Their field experiment focused on overt and subtle retail discrimination. Conducted in high-
end retailers in...