The Prison Journal

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mears, D. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
The Prison Journal, Vol. 86, No. 4, 470-490 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0032885506294237

Exploring State-Level Variation in Juvenile Incarceration Rates

Symbolic Threats and Competing Explanations

Daniel P. Mears

Florida State University, Tallahassee, dmears{at}fsu.edu

Despite large-scale increases in juvenile incarceration rates nationally, relatively little attention has been given to explaining why some states invest more heavily than others in the long-term confinement of young offenders. This article explores four potential explanations. First, investment in juvenile incarceration may be greater where symbolic threats to social order are higher. Second, it may be greater in states where crime, especially juvenile violent crime, is more prevalent. Third, juvenile incarceration practices may simply reflect those deemed suitable for adult offenders; thus, states with higher adult incarceration rates may incarcerate more juveniles. Finally, cultural acceptance of punitive policies, as in the South, may contribute to higher rates of juvenile incarceration. Using state-level data, the article focuses primarily on the first explanation and the extent to which the alternatives can account for any observed symbolic threat effect. The study’s implications for policy and research are discussed.

Key Words: juvenile • incarceration • symbolic threat


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Criminal Justice Policy ReviewHome page
D. P. Mears and J. A. Butts
Using Performance Monitoring to Improve the Accountability, Operations, and Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice
Criminal Justice Policy Review, September 1, 2008; 19(3): 264 - 284.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Youth JusticeHome page
J. Muncie
The `Punitive Turn' in Juvenile Justice: Cultures of Control and Rights Compliance in Western Europe and the USA
Youth Justice, August 1, 2008; 8(2): 107 - 121.
[Abstract] [PDF]