Skip to Content
0 Votes
Version 15.1 by Ryan C on 2025/06/23 05:01
Show last authors
1 = Crime and Substance Abuse =
2
3 {{expandable summary="Study: Rape and Racial Patterns"}}
4 **Source:** *Crime and Delinquency*
5 **Date of Publication:** *1984*
6 **Author(s):** *James L. LeBeau*
7 **Title:** *"Rape and Racial Patterns"*
8 **DOI:** *Unavailable – Published in Crime and Delinquency journal, 1984*
9 **Subject Matter:** *Interracial Crime, Racial Patterns in Sexual Violence, Police Data Analysis*
10
11 {{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
12 1. **General Observations:**
13 - Study analyzed **rape cases from six U.S. cities** (Chicago, Kansas City, Oakland, San Diego, St. Louis, San Jose) over a two-year period.
14 - Used **official police data** with verified offender and victim race.
15
16 2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
17 - Confirmed that most rapes are intraracial, but found **significant exceptions in Black-on-White rape rates**.
18 - **White women were the most frequent victims** in interracial rape cases involving Black and Latino offenders.
19
20 3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
21 - In **San Diego and Oakland**, Black offenders were responsible for **more than half of all rapes of White women**.
22 - Interracial rape by White offenders against Black women was virtually nonexistent in the cities studied.
23 {{/expandable}}
24
25 {{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
26 1. **Primary Observations:**
27 - While intraracial rape dominates overall patterns, **interracial rape involving Black offenders and White victims is substantially higher than commonly reported**.
28 - Some cities showed **disproportionate rates of Black-on-White sexual violence** compared to their population size.
29
30 2. **Subgroup Trends:**
31 - **Latino offenders also disproportionately targeted White women** in certain cities.
32 - White offenders rarely targeted minority women, particularly Black women.
33
34 3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
35 - Previous studies misrepresented interracial rape by **counting serial offenders multiple times**, which inflated minority perpetration rates — this study corrected that and still found high Black-on-White victimization rates.
36 - San Diego reported that **more than half of all rapes of White women involved Black offenders**.
37 {{/expandable}}
38
39 {{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
40 1. **Strengths of the Study:**
41 - Directly challenges popular misconceptions about interracial rape patterns.
42 - Carefully controls for methodological errors common in prior race-crime studies.
43
44 2. **Limitations of the Study:**
45 - Study is limited to six cities and a two-year window, though the selected locations offer racial diversity.
46 - Does not address sociological or cultural explanations for the observed disparities.
47
48 3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
49 - Expand analysis to more cities and rural areas to see if the pattern holds nationally.
50 - Incorporate victim and offender socioeconomic data for deeper structural understanding.
51 {{/expandable}}
52
53 {{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
54 - Provides **critical empirical support for challenging the myth** that interracial rape is balanced or insignificant.
55 - Documents that **White women are disproportionately targeted by minority offenders**, particularly Black and Latino men.
56 - Supports broader analysis of **racial crime patterns that contradict DEI-framed narratives** about victimization.
57 {{/expandable}}
58
59 {{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
60 1. Compare more recent race-rape statistics to see if patterns persist over time.
61 2. Investigate **media reporting practices** on interracial sexual violence.
62 3. Study the cultural impact of misrepresenting interracial crime statistics in public discourse.
63 {{/expandable}}
64
65 {{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
66 [[Download Full Study>>attach:13.LeBeau_Rape_Racial_Patterns.pdf]]
67 {{/expandable}}
68 {{/expandable}}
69
70
71 {{expandable summary="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"}}
72 **Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
73 **Date of Publication:** *2002*
74 **Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti*
75 **Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"*
76 **DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424)
77 **Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts*
78
79 {{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
80 1. **General Observations:**
81 - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders.
82 - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**.
83
84 2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
85 - Individuals with **stable jobs were more likely to complete the program**.
86 - **Black participants had lower success rates**, suggesting potential systemic disparities.
87
88 3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
89 - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion.
90 - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**.
91 {{/expandable}}
92
93 {{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
94 1. **Primary Observations:**
95 - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success.
96 - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates.
97
98 2. **Subgroup Trends:**
99 - White offenders had **higher completion rates** than Black offenders.
100 - Drug court success was **higher for those with lower initial drug use frequency**.
101
102 3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
103 - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**.
104 - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**.
105 {{/expandable}}
106
107 {{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
108 1. **Strengths of the Study:**
109 - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**.
110 - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis.
111
112 2. **Limitations of the Study:**
113 - Lacks **qualitative data on personal motivation and treatment engagement**.
114 - Focuses on **short-term program success** without tracking **long-term relapse rates**.
115
116 3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
117 - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**.
118 - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**.
119 {{/expandable}}
120
121 {{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
122 - Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**.
123 - Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**.
124 - Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**.
125 {{/expandable}}
126
127 {{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
128 1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**.
129 2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**.
130 3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**.
131 {{/expandable}}
132
133 {{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
134 [[Download Full Study>>attach:butzin2002.pdf]]
135 {{/expandable}}
136 {{/expandable}}
137
138 {{expandable summary="Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"}}
139 **Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse*
140 **Date of Publication:** *2003*
141 **Author(s):** *Timothy P. Johnson, Phillip J. Bowman*
142 **Title:** *"Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"*
143 **DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120023394](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120023394)
144 **Subject Matter:** *Survey Methodology, Racial Disparities, Substance Use Research*
145
146 {{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
147 1. **General Observations:**
148 - Study examined **how racial and cultural factors influence self-reported substance use data**.
149 - Analyzed **36 empirical studies from 1977–2003** on survey reliability across racial/ethnic groups.
150
151 2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
152 - Black and Latino respondents **were more likely to underreport drug use** compared to White respondents.
153 - **Cultural stigma and distrust in research institutions** affected self-report accuracy.
154
155 3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
156 - **Surveys using biological validation (urinalysis, hair tests) revealed underreporting trends**.
157 - **Higher recantation rates** (denying past drug use) were observed among minority respondents.
158 {{/expandable}}
159
160 {{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
161 1. **Primary Observations:**
162 - Racial/ethnic disparities in **substance use reporting bias survey-based research**.
163 - **Social desirability and cultural norms impact data reliability**.
164
165 2. **Subgroup Trends:**
166 - White respondents were **more likely to overreport** substance use.
167 - Black and Latino respondents **had higher recantation rates**, particularly in face-to-face interviews.
168
169 3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
170 - Mode of survey administration **significantly influenced reporting accuracy**.
171 - **Self-administered surveys produced more reliable data than interviewer-administered surveys**.
172 {{/expandable}}
173
174 {{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
175 1. **Strengths of the Study:**
176 - **Comprehensive review of 36 studies** on measurement error in substance use reporting.
177 - Identifies **systemic biases affecting racial/ethnic survey reliability**.
178
179 2. **Limitations of the Study:**
180 - Relies on **secondary data analysis**, limiting direct experimental control.
181 - Does not explore **how measurement error impacts policy decisions**.
182
183 3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
184 - Future research should **incorporate mixed-method approaches** (qualitative & quantitative).
185 - Investigate **how survey design can reduce racial reporting disparities**.
186 {{/expandable}}
187
188 {{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
189 - Supports research on **racial disparities in self-reported health behaviors**.
190 - Highlights **survey methodology issues that impact substance use epidemiology**.
191 - Provides insights for **improving data accuracy in public health research**.
192 {{/expandable}}
193
194 {{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
195 1. Investigate **how survey design impacts racial disparities in self-reported health data**.
196 2. Study **alternative data collection methods (biometric validation, passive data tracking)**.
197 3. Explore **the role of social stigma in self-reported health behaviors**.
198 {{/expandable}}
199
200 {{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
201 [[Download Full Study>>attach:10.3109_10826087709027235.pdf]]
202 {{/expandable}}
203 {{/expandable}}
204
205 {{expandable summary="Study: Racial Differences in Marijuana Users’ Risk of Arrest in the United States"}}
206 **Source:** *Drug and Alcohol Dependence*
207 **Date of Publication:** *2006*
208 **Author(s):** *Rajeev Ramchand, Rosalie Liccardo Pacula, Martin Y. Iguchi*
209 **Title:** *"Racial Differences in Marijuana Users’ Risk of Arrest in the United States"*
210 **DOI:** [10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2006.02.010](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2006.02.010)
211 **Subject Matter:** *Marijuana Use, Policing, Racial Disparities, Drug Markets*
212
213 {{expandable summary="📊 Key Statistics"}}
214 1. **General Observations:**
215 - African Americans are **2.5× more likely** to be arrested for marijuana possession than Whites.
216 - Arrest disparity persists **despite similar usage rates** between groups.
217
218 2. **Subgroup Analysis:**
219 - African Americans were:
220 - **Twice as likely** to buy outdoors (0.31 vs. 0.14)
221 - **Three times as likely** to buy from a stranger (0.30 vs. 0.09)
222 - **More likely** to buy away from home (0.61 vs. 0.48)
223
224 3. **Other Significant Data Points:**
225 - Over **39% of all U.S. drug arrests in 2002** were for marijuana possession.
226 - Nearly **80% of the increase in drug arrests from 1990–2002** was due to marijuana alone.
227 {{/expandable}}
228
229 {{expandable summary="🔬 Findings"}}
230 1. **Primary Observations:**
231 - **Differences in purchasing behavior** partially explain racial arrest disparities.
232 - Riskier purchasing settings (outdoors, strangers, away from home) increase arrest probability.
233
234 2. **Subgroup Trends:**
235 - African Americans’ higher arrest rates are linked more to **behavioral exposure** than usage frequency.
236 - Purchasing from strangers and in public **correlates with law enforcement encounters**.
237
238 3. **Specific Case Analysis:**
239 - Results based on **2002 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH)**.
240 - Multivariate regression models confirm **race remains a significant predictor** even after controlling for demographics and behaviors.
241 {{/expandable}}
242
243 {{expandable summary="📝 Critique & Observations"}}
244 1. **Strengths of the Study:**
245 - Uses **nationally representative survey data** and robust statistical modeling.
246 - Separates **usage rates from behavior-related arrest risks**.
247
248 2. **Limitations of the Study:**
249 - Focused specifically on **marijuana**, may not generalize to other drugs.
250 - **Does not directly test law enforcement bias**, only behavioral correlates of arrest risk.
251
252 3. **Suggestions for Improvement:**
253 - Include **law enforcement data** on arrest locations and procedures.
254 - Extend model to **longitudinal outcomes** (repeat arrest, conviction).
255 {{/expandable}}
256
257 {{expandable summary="📌 Relevance to Subproject"}}
258 - Supports the argument that **behavioral patterns—not usage rates—drive racial arrest disparities**.
259 - Highlights **systemic vulnerability among Black marijuana users** due to social context of purchases.
260 - Reinforces critique of **“race-neutral” enforcement** in drug policy discussions.
261 {{/expandable}}
262
263 {{expandable summary="🔍 Suggestions for Further Exploration"}}
264 1. Study **how police patrol patterns** correlate with outdoor purchasing risk.
265 2. Investigate **racial profiling in drug arrests** beyond behavioral correlates.
266 3. Compare marijuana purchase risks in **urban vs. suburban contexts**.
267 {{/expandable}}
268
269 {{expandable summary="📄 Download Full Study"}}
270 [[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1016_j.drugalcdep.2006.02.010.pdf]]
271 {{/expandable}}
272 {{/expandable}}