Research on gender and presentencing investigative reports documents that significant differences regarding male and female offenders exist both in terms of criminal history and type of current offense and in the types of problems experienced by offenders and their motivations for engaging in criminal behaviors. Drawing from attribution theory to understand how probation officers make assessments on the culpability of youth on probation, this study addresses whether differences in probation officers’ descriptions of male and female offenders exist that cannot be explained by the seriousness of the crime or the criminal history of the offender. Results indicate areas of significant quantitative and qualitative differences by gender. Although the findings demonstrate that issues of sexuality, drug use, and family conflict continue to represent significant differential pathways for female offenders, it appears that probation officers are beginning to acknowledge the impact of these factors in explaining delinquent behaviors.
Acoca, L. (1999). Investing in girls: A 21st century strategy. Juvenile Justice, 6(1), 3-13.
2.
Acoca, L., & Dedel, K. (1997). Identifying the needs of young women in the juvenile justice system. San Francisco: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.
3.
Albonetti, C. A. (1986). Criminality, prosecutorial screening, and uncertainty: Toward a theory of discretionary decision making in felony case processing. Criminology, 24(4), 623-645.
4.
Baines, M., & Alder, C. (1996). Are girls more difficult to work with? Youth workers’ perspectives in juvenile justice and related areas. Crime & Delinquency, 42(3), 467-485.
5.
Belknap, J. (2001). The invisible woman: Gender, crime and justice (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
6.
Belknap, J., & Holsinger, K. (1998). An overview of delinquent girls: How theory and practice failed and the need for innovative change. In R. Zaplin (Ed.), Female crime and delinquency: Critical perspectives and effective interventions (pp. 31-64). Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen.
7.
Belknap, J., & Holsinger, K. (2006). The gendered nature of risk factors for delinquency. Feminist Criminology, 1(1), 48-71.
8.
Belknap, J., Holsinger, K., & Dunn, M. (1997). Understanding incarcerated girls: The results of a focus group study. Prison Journal, 77(4), 381-404.
9.
Belknap, J., Winter, E., & Cady, B. (2003). Professional assessments of the needs of delinquent girls: The results of a focus group study. In B. Bloom (Ed.), Gendered justice: Addressing female offenders (pp. 209-240). Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
10.
Bishop, D. M., & Frazier, C. E. (1992). Gender bias in juvenile justice processing: Implications of the JJDP Act. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 82, 1162-1186.
11.
Bloom, B., Owen, B., Deschenes, E. P., & Rosenbaum, J. (2002). Moving toward justice for female juvenile offenders in the new millennium: Modeling gender-specific policies and programs. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 181, 37-56.
12.
Bloom, B., Owen, B., Rosenbaum, J., & Deschenes, E. P. (1998). Modeling gender-specific services in juvenile justice: Policy and program recommendations. Sacramento: Office of Criminal Justice Planning, State of California.
13.
Bloom, B., Owen, B., Rosenbaum, J., & Deschenes, E. P. (2003). Focusing on girls and young women: A gendered perspective on female delinquency. Women and Criminal Justice, 14(2/3), 117-136.
14.
Boulder County Juvenile Center. (1999). Policy manual. Boulder, CO: Author.
15.
Bridges, G. S., & Steen, S. (1998). Racial disparities in official assessments of juvenile offenders: Attributional stereotypes as mediating mechanisms. American Sociological Review, 63, 554-570.
16.
Chesney-Lind, M. (1989). Girls’ crime and women’s place: Toward a feminist model of female delinquency. Crime & Delinquency, 35(1), 5-29.
17.
Chesney-Lind, M., & Shelden, R. G. (1998). Girls, delinquency and juvenile justice. Belmont, CA: West/Wadsworth.
18.
Cicourel, A. (1968). The social organization of juvenile justice. New York: John Wiley.
19.
Daly, K. (1992). Women’s pathways to felony court: Feminist theories of lawbreaking and problems of representation. Review of Law and Women’s Studies, 2, 11-52.
20.
Daly, K. (1994). Gender, crime and punishment. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
21.
Drass, K. A., & Spencer, J. S. (1994). Accounting for pre-sentencing recommendations: Typologies and probation officers’ theory of office. Social Problems, 34, 277-293.
22.
Emerson, R. M. (1969). Judging delinquents: Context and process in juvenile court. Chicago: Aldine.
23.
Gaarder, E., Rodriguez, N., & Zatz, M. S. (2005). Cries, liars and manipulators: Probation officers’ views of girls. Justice Quarterly, 21(3), 547-578.
24.
Gailey, J. A., & Lee, M. T. (2005). An integrated model of attribution of responsibility for wrongdoing in organizations. Social Psychological Quarterly, 68(4), 338-358.
25.
Gerber, G. L., Cronin, J. M., & Steigman, H. J. (2004). Attributions of blame in sexual assault to perpetrators and victims of both genders. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(10), 2149-2165.
26.
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: John Wiley.
27.
Henning, K., Jones, A. R., & Holdford, R. (2005). “I didn’t do it, but if I did I had a good reason”: Minimization, denial and attributions of blame among male and female domestic violence offenders. Journal of Family Violence, 20(3), 131-139.
28.
Holsinger, K. (2000). Feminist perspectives on female offending: Examining real girls’ lives. Women and Criminal Justice, 12(1), 23-51.
29.
Horn, R., & Evans, M. (2000). The effect of gender on pre-sentence reports. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 39(2), 189-197.
30.
Inderbitzin, M. (2007). The impact of gender on juvenile justice decisions. In R. Muraskin (Ed.), It’s a crime: Women and justice (4th ed., pp. 782-791). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
31.
Kempf-Leonard, K., & Sample, L. (2000). Disparity based on sex: Is gender-specific treatment warranted. Justice Quarterly, 17(1), 89-128.
32.
MacDonald, J. M., & Chesney-Lind, M. (2001). Gender bias and juvenile justice revisited: A multiyear analysis. Crime & Delinquency, 47, 173-195.
33.
Mason, G. E., Riger, S., & Foley, L. A. (2004). The impact of past sexual experiences on attributions of responsibility for rape. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19(10), 1157-1171.
34.
Odem, M. E. (1995). Delinquent daughters: Protecting and policing adolescent female sexuality in the United States: 1885-1920. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
35.
Owen, B., & Bloom, B. (1998). Modeling gender specific services in juvenile justice: Final report to the Office of Criminal Justice Planning. Sacramento, CA: OCJP.
36.
Platt, A. M. (1969). The child savers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37.
Quinsey, V. L., & Cyr, M. (1986). Perceived dangerousness and treatability of offenders: The effects of internal versus external attributions of crime causality. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1(4), 458-471.
38.
Rosenbaum, J. L., & Chesney-Lind, M. (1994). Appearance and delinquency: A research note. Crime & Delinquency, 40(2), 250-262.
39.
Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80, 1-26.
40.
Rush, C., & Robertson, J. (1987). Presentence reports: The utility of information to the sentencing decision. Law and Human Behavior, 11, 147-155.
41.
Saulters-Tubbs, C. (1993). Prosecutorial and judicial treatment of female offenders. Federal Probation, 57, 37-42.
42.
Smith, H., Rodriguez, N., & Zatz, M. (2006). No place for girls to go: How juvenile court officials respond to substance abuse among girls and boys. In K. Heimer & C. Kruttschnitt (Eds.), Gender and crime: Patterns in victimization and offending (pp. 67-90). New York: NYU Press.
43.
Snyder, H. N., & Sickmund, M. (1999) Juvenile offenders and victims: 1999 national report. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
44.
Spencer, J. W. (1984). Conducting presentencing investigations: From discourse to textual summaries. Urban Life, 13, 207-227.
45.
Spohn, C., Gruhl, J., & Welch, S. (1987). The impact of the ethnicity and gender of defendants on the decision to reject or dismiss felony charges. Criminology, 25, 175-191.
46.
Tolman, D. L. (1994). Doing desire: Adolescent girls’ struggles for/with sexuality. Gender and Society, 8(3), 324-342.
47.
Visher, C. A. (1983). Gender, police arrest decisions and notions of chivalry. Criminology, 21, 5-28.
48.
Wakelin, A., & Long, K. M. (2003). Effects of victim gender and sexuality on attributions of blame to rape victims. Sex Roles, 49(9/10), 477-487.
49.
Walsh, A. (1985). The role of the probation officer in the sentencing process: Independent professional or judicial hack. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 12, 289-303.
50.
Watkins, M. G. (1998). The role of gender and race in pre-sentencing attributions: How probation officers explain the criminal behavior of juvenile offenders. Seattle: University of Washington.
51.
Weiner, B., Heckhausen, H., Meyer, W., & Cook, R. E. (1972). Causal ascriptions and achievement behavior: A conceptual analysis of effort and reanalysis of locus of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 239-248.
52.
Workman, J. E., & Freeburg, E. W. (1999). An examination of date rape, victim dress, and perceiver variables within the context of attribution theory. Sex Roles, 41(3/4), 261-277.
53.
Worthen, J. B., & Varnado-Sullivan, P. (2005). Gender bias in attributions of responsibility for abuse. Journal of Family Violence, 20(5), 305-311.
