Racial Disparity in Police Contacts

• DOI: 10.1177/2153368712448063
• Author: Martie L. Skinner,Kevin P. Haggerty,Robert D. Crutchfield,Anne McGlynn,Richard F. Catalano
• Date: 01 July 2012
• Published date: 01 July 2012
• Subject Matter: Articles

Racial Disparity in Police

Contacts

Robert D. Crutchfield

1

, Martie L. Skinner

1

,

Kevin P. Haggerty

1

, Anne McGlynn

1

, and

Richard F. Catalano

1

Abstract

Criminologists agree the race disparity in arrests cannot be fully explained by differ-

ences in criminal behavior. The authors examine social environment factors that may

lead to racial differences in police contact in early adolescence, including family, peers,

school, and community. Data are from 331 eighth-grade students. Blacks were almost

twice as likely as Whites to report a police contact. Blacks reported more property

crime but not more violent crime than Whites. Police contacts were increased by

having a parent who had been arrested, a sibling involved in criminal activity, higher

observed reward for negative behavior, having school disciplinary actions, and know-

ing adults who engaged in substance abuse or criminal behavior. Race differences in

police contacts were partially attributable to more school discipline.

Keywords

race disparity, police contacts, environment

Introduction

For more than 30 years, criminologists have studied racial differences in criminal

justice experiences. Studies have considered both juvenile and adult patterns of arrest

(Piliavin & Briar, 1964), conviction (Adler, 2006; Harmon, 2004), and sentencing

(Kleck, 1981). These studies have traced individuals in the criminal (Engen, Gainey,

Crutchfield, & Weis, 2003) and juvenile justice systems (Bridges & Steen, 1998), and

a number of studies have considered correlates of aggregate race differences in

criminal justice processing (Blumstein, 1982; Bridges & Crutchfield, 1988). Results

1

University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

Corresponding Author:

Martie L. Skinner, University of Washington, 9725 3rd Ave. NE, Suite 401, Seattle, WA 98115, USA

Email: skinnm@u.washington.edu

Race and Justice

2(3) 179-202

ªThe Author(s) 2012

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/2153368712448063

http://raj.sagepub.com

vary about how much racial disparity exists and about the proportion of observed

differences that can be attributed to legally relevant variables, (e.g., criminal invol-

vement, offense seriousness, and offenders’ criminal histories). Though criminolo-

gists do not agree on the proportion of racial differences in criminal justice processing

that can be explained by legal differences, they do concur that not all of the observable

disparity can be explained by legally relevant race differences (Blumstein, 1982;

Crutchfield, Bridges, & Pitchford, 1994; Crutchfield, Fernandes, & Martinez, 2010;

Langan, 1985). What then explains why people of color have more contacts with police,

have higher arrest and conviction rates, and are more likely to spend time in prison?

The popular answer is discrimination on the part of police, prosecutors, and judges.

Unfortunately, we cannot directly assess with standard quantitative analytic

methods either specific acts of discrimination or racist sentiments on the part of

criminal justice officials while performing their duties. Not surprisingly, officials

generally do not reveal on questionnaires or in interviews that they are prejudiced.

Laboratory research on implicit bias (Greenwald, Oakes, & Hoffman, 2003;

Joy-Gaba & Nosek, 2010) has made important strides measuring unconscious

reactions to race by studying physiological changes produced by controlled sti-

muli, but this methodology does not apply well to field studies to definitively

draw conclusions about discriminatory attitudes or behaviors in criminal justice

settings. Qualitative studies have reported subtle forms of racial biases on the part

of court actors (Bridges & Steen, 1998; Harris, 2009). So discrimination remains

a viable interpretation of legally unexplained racial differences in criminal justice

decisions; but one difficult to measure in large field studies.

Another possibleexplanation is seemingly raciallyneutral criminal justice practices,

such as bail standards that emphasize the importance of defendant characteristics, dis-

advantage some segments of the population (e.g., residential stability disadvantaging

migrant workers). Here we focus on racial differences in police contacts for juveniles.

Obviously, one reason that young people come into contact with police is delinquency.

We address two questions: first, arethere racial differences in policecontacts which are

not explained by criminal involvement,and second, are there features of social life that

help explainthese differences.Differential contactswith the police areimportant because

they potentiallyput young people who have these experiencesat risk in other aspects of

their lives. We morefully discuss these risks below.

Garland (2001, p. 114) argues that in the wake of the upheaval, riots, and criticisms

in the 1960s and 1970s, police strove to become more professional and used more

technology, and moved away from close community contact. Because that approach

did not produce reductions in crime, police departments changed their strategies,

leading to widespread adoption of community policing practices in the last decades of

the 20th century. The earlier period, where professionalization was stressed, led to

poor interaction with the populace, especially poor and minority communities. The

newer community policing approach brings officers into more daily contact with the

public. This means that young people are now more likely to encounter police in a

broad array of their social environments, including in their neighborhoods and

schools.

180 Race and Justice 2(3)