The goal of sex offender registration is to protect residents from recidivistic sexual offenders by providing public information about local offenders. This study determines what percentage of residents living near registered sex offenders are aware of the offenders and the predictors of awareness. The investigational group includes randomly selected residents, who completed surveys, living within one-tenth of a mile of registered sex offenders. A control group—those without sex offenders nearby—is included to see if residents believe offenders to be in every neighborhood. Significantly more investigational group respondents report that a sex offender lives in the neighborhood (31% vs. 2%). Hierarchical linear modeling confirms both individual and neighborhood predictors of awareness.
Beck, V.S., Clingermayer, J., Ramsey, R.J., & Travis, L.F. ( 2004). Community responses to sex offenders. Journal of Psychiatry and Law, 32, 141-168.
2.
Beck, V.S., & Travis, L.F. ( 2004). Sex offender notification and protective behavior. Violence and Victims, 19, 289-302.
3.
Beck, V.S., & Travis, L.F. ( 2006). Sex offender notification: An exploratory assessment of state variation in notification processes. Journal of Criminal Justice, 34, 51-55.
4.
Canter, D., & Larkin, P. ( 1993). The environmental range of serial rapists. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 13, 63-69.
5.
Caputo, A.A. & Brodsky, S.L. ( 2004). Citizen coping with community notification of released sex offenders. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 22, 239-252.
6.
Coulton, C.J. ( 2005). The place of community in social work practice research: Conceptual and methodological developments. Social Work Research , 29, 73-86.
7.
Coulton, C.J., Cook, T., & Irwin, M. ( 2004). Aggregation issues in neighborhood research: A comparison of several levels of census geography and resident defined neighborhoods. Retrieved February 17, 2005, from http://povertycenter.cwru.edu/urban_poverty/dev/pdf/appam1104.pdf
8.
Coulton, C.J., Korbin, J., Chan, T., & Su, M. ( 2001) Mapping residents’ perceptions of neighborhood boundaries: A methodological note. American Journal of Community Psychology , 29, 371-383.
9.
Coulton, C.J., Korbin, J., & Su, M. ( 1996). Measuring neighborhood context for young children in an urban area. American Journal of Community Psychology, 24, 5-32.
10.
Dillman, D.A. ( 1991). The design and administration of mail surveys. Annual Review of Sociology, 17, 225-249.
11.
Earls, F. ( 1999). Project on human development in Chicago neighborhoods: Community survey, 1994-1995 [Computer file]. Boston: Harvard Medical School [producer], 1997; Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor].
12.
Hanson, R.K., & Bussiere, M.T. (1998). Predicting relapse: A meta-analysis of sexual offender recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 348-362.
13.
Kubrin, C.E., & Weitzer, R. ( 2003). New directions in social disorganization theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40, 374-402.
14.
Langan, P.A., Schmitt, E.L., & Durose, M.R. ( 2003). Recidivism of sex offenders released from prison in 1994 . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
15.
Lisak, D., & Miller, P.M. ( 2002). Repeat rape and multiple offending among undetected rapists . Violence and Victims, 17, 73-84.
16.
Matson, S., & Lieb, R. ( 1996). Community notification in Washington State: 1996 survey of law enforcement. Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Retrieved May 23, 2003 , from http://www.wa.gov/wsipp/crime/cprot.html
17.
Mustaine, E.E., Tewksbury, R., & Stengel, K.M. ( 2006). Social disorganization and residential locations of registered sex offenders: Is this a collateral consequence? Deviant Behavior , 27, 329-350.
18.
Phillips, D.M. ( 1998). Community notification as viewed by Washington’s citizens. Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy. Retrieved May 23, 2003, from http://www.wa.gov/wsipp/crime/cprot.html
19.
Pincus, W. ( 1998). Megan’s law and the protection of the child in the on-line age. American Criminal Law Review, 35, 1319-1334.
20.
Proctor, J.L., Badzinski, D.M., & Johnson, M. ( 2002). The impact of media on knowledge and perceptions of Megan’s Law. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 13, 356-379.
21.
Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A.S. ( 2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .
22.
Sampson, R.J., & Groves, W.B. ( 1989). Community structure and crime: Testing social-disorganization theory. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 774-802.
23.
Sampson, R.J., Raudenbush, S.W., & Earls, F. ( 1997). Neighborhoods and violence crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 918-924.
24.
Tewksbury, R. ( 2002). Validity and utility of the Kentucky sex offender registry . Federal Probation, 66, 21-26.
25.
Tewksbury, R., & Lees, M.B. ( 2007). Perceptions of punishment: How registered sex offenders view registries. Crime & Delinquency, 53, 380-407.
26.
Tolan, P.H., Gorman-Smith, D., & Henry, D.B. ( 2001). Chicago Youth Development Study community and neighborhood measure: Construction and reliability technical report. Retrieved May 5, 2006, from www.cdc.gov/ncipc/pub-res/pdf/YV/CDC_YV_SecIV.pdf
27.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2005). United States Census 2000 Summary File 3 [Data file]. Available from American FactFinder Web site: http://factfinder.census.gov
28.
Zevitz, R.G. ( 2003). Sex offender community notification and its impact on neighborhood life. Crime Prevention and Community Safety: An International Journal, 5, 41-61.
29.
Zevitz, R.G., & Farkas, M. ( 2000). Sex offender community notification: Examining the importance of neighborhood meetings. Behavioral Sciences & the Law , 18, 393-408.
