Cheryl L. Johnson, PhD

The field of criminology and criminal justice encompass broad and complex multidisciplinary topics. Most of the research that falls under these areas uses either quantitative or qualitative methodologies, with historically limited use of mixed methods designs. Research utilizing mixed methods has increased within the social sciences in recent years, including a steadily growing body of mixed method research in criminal justice and criminology. The goal of this study was to examine how mixed method designs are being employed within research related to criminal justice and criminology. Our systematic review located 327 mixed method articles published between 2001 and 2017. Findings indicated most criminology and criminal justice research is being conducted within the specialty area of victimology. This study provides an overview of mixed methods research in criminology and criminal justice and also illustrates that most publications are not including methodological concepts specific to mixed methods research (e.g., integration). Along with our systematic review, we offer a series of recommendations to move mixed methods research forward in criminology and criminal justice.

While we are all aware that there were racial, gender, and class disparities throughout American history, many of us do not think about the historical events that led to the creation of such terms. McDonald takes a unique approach to the issues surrounding race, gender, and class in the criminal justice system by not only examining the historical roots of these terms but by connecting how the historical events have shaped today’s definition of these terms. Many textbooks tend to look at the connections between either race or gender or class with criminal justice, but McDonald takes a unique approach by looking at the intersectionality of all three characteristics on criminal justice experiences. This important distinction allows readers to truly understand how each of these characteristics impacts different experiences at different points in the criminal justice system.

Race, Gender, Class, and Criminal Justice is a cogent examination of how these three important characteristics impact individuals at different stages of the criminal justice system. McDonald accomplishes this by taking each concept (race, gender, and class) and examining each as a separate entity to allow readers to get an in depth understanding. Each term is explained through multiple historical examples which show how the term has evolved over the years. This approach is also done for the three major criminal justice components: policing, courts, and corrections. By looking at this issue in this way, it is easier to gain a better understanding about what race, gender, and crime actually are as well as how they intersect not only with the police, courts, and corrections but also with each other differently.

The junction of these characteristics with the major criminal justice sections forms the meat of this text. Instead of explaining what the police, courts, and corrections systems do, McDonald tackles different areas within each section that can be viewed as discriminatory to certain races, genders, or classes. For example, she tackles racial profiling and police, problem-solving versus crime prevention courts, and overuse of incarceration. However, she also goes beyond these three major criminal justice components and examines domestic violence and human trafficking.

This text is organized in a very logical manner, as it starts by defining each term and explaining how the term “crime” is constantly evolving before shifting to examine the relationship between these terms within different parts of the criminal justice system. This layout is extremely beneficial for readers because it provides a starting platform where readers can all form similar definitions of race, class, and gender, which allows for a more unified understanding of the problems related to these issues that are discussed later in the text. Not only does McDonald examine this intersectionality, but she also explores the differences between different combinations of each characteristic. For example, she notes that there is a different experience with the criminal justice system for lower class Hispanic men versus upper class Hispanic women. While the race of the individual remains the same in this example, the class level and gender differ, which contributes to differential treatment.

Danielle McDonald is the assistant chair and an associate professor of criminal justice in the Department of Political Science, Criminal Justice & Organizational Leadership at the Northern Kentucky University. She uses many service learning and student philanthropy pedagogy techniques to engage her students and allow them to connect with what they observe and experience in the community. This approach allows her to see firsthand how race, gender, and class interact with policing, courts, and corrections and makes her a prime candidate to write on this topic. Race, Gender, Class, and Criminal Justice is a perfect outlet for her knowledge on these characteristics intersectionality with one another.

This book provides historically based definitions of race, gender, and class and then critically examines how different combinations of these characteristics shape a person’s interaction and experience with the criminal justice police, courts, and corrections. This manuscript is crucial for scholars to read because it tackles a very relevant issue in today’s research and explains how a one-size-fits-all definition of each term does not allow for a true understanding of their intersectionality in the criminal justice system. It also forces academics to really consider this issue. Does an upper class African American man interact with the criminal justice system in a similar way as an upper class Hispanic man? McDonald challenges us to critically think about these types of questions and forces readers to expand their thinking to actually understand these issues. This better understanding allows researchers to devise policies and plans that will provide a better solution for all parties involved.

Using data on middle-school adolescents from the Rural Substance Abuse and Violence Project (RSVP), the authors examined the extent to which psychological difficulties are related to student weapon carrying and use, net of other criminological variables. Furthermore, the authors examined whether psychological difficulties had variable effects across school contexts. Initial logistic regression models showed that variables tapping psychological difficulties (fear of crime, family history of mental illness, and low self-control) were significantly related to student weapon carrying and use. Once other criminological and demographic controls were added, only low self-control remained significant. Multilevel models incorporating random slope coefficients and cross-level interactions showed that the relationship between low self-control and student weapon carrying/use was attenuated in schools with higher levels of school efficacy and school security. Similarly, the relationship between fear of crime and weapon carrying depended on the level of school security, with the effect weakened as school security increased.

Although we contend that juvenile delinquency is not a new phenomenon, David McCallum provides a unique look at this issue occurring in Australia and among the Aboriginal peoples in particular. Across Australia, the number of incarcerated juveniles is increasing despite many efforts to decrease it. While this is troubling, a major concern is that the Indigenous children are being incarcerated at even higher levels than other juveniles. Both are serious issues that McCallum seeks to address by exploring how these issues arose in the first place. Ultimately, this text challenges the notion that law and human sciences know what is best when attempting to predict and reduce juvenile delinquency. Instead, it implies that by looking solely at the numbers and hard facts, some groups are singled out and receive the focus of the punishment.

Criminalizing Children is a compelling examination of the policies used by Victorian welfare and justice authorities to classify at-risk children and how the circumstances of those policies’ emergence influenced the system today. McCallum accomplishes this through the examination of historical manuscripts and personal stories from the Aboriginal peoples within the Australian state of Victoria. While firsthand accounts and personal narratives may be problematic in terms of generalizability, they allow the reader to personally connect in a way that numbers do not allow. By examining this issue in this way, it is easier to gain an in-depth understanding from the people who experienced it. Many of us could not begin to imagine what the Aboriginal peoples had to endure, so the use of narratives, coupled with historical documents, allow us to do so.

He begins the examination by introducing readers to the historical backstory between the British and the Aboriginal peoples. While he includes descriptions of the criminal children, McCallum goes beyond the simple examination of the race as a motivating factor for the over incarceration of criminal children. After providing readers with an examination of children in the justice system in the early 20th century, McCallum takes a unique approach to this phenomenon by examining it through the psychological lens. As he states, a new problem was emerging in relation to Aboriginal welfare—the problematic “psychology” of the Aboriginal family.

Early conjecture believed that those children with mental deficiencies should not be mixed with more normal children because it could be extremely harmful not only for the normal child but also for the child with mental issues. For many people, this meant that there had to be an immediate separation of these defective children from the normal children. Their solution: institutionalization. Like most instance of immediate institutionalization, many of the children were sent away and received little to no medical treatment as it was believed that these mental deficiencies were incurable. It is here that McCallum breaks away from the traditional approach to this topic by expanding upon not only the reasons for this occurring but also how these beliefs were overcome.

This book is organized in a very logical manner, as it starts with the history of the relationship between the Aboriginal peoples and the State of Australia before moving into the more complex examination of the troubled and neglected children. This layout is extremely beneficial for readers who are not familiar with the Aboriginal peoples’ struggle. Not only does McCallum discuss the criminalized Aboriginal children, he also delves into the criminalization of White children as well. By examining both groups of children, he allows readers to understand the bigger picture of the increasing criminalization of children in Australia. By applying a social theoretical analysis of race and subculture, McCallum challenges readers’ assumptions that the law and governance of children always have the child’s best interests at heart.

David McCallum is an Emeritus Professor at the Centre for International Research on Education Systems and is the author or coauthor of four books and over 40 articles in the field of human sciences. He was also the previous Head of Humanities and Social Sciences Discipline Group in the College of Arts & Education at Victoria University from 2014 to 2017. As a member of the Sociological Association of Australia and the International Sociological Association, McCallum is in a prime position to write on this topic. Criminalizing Children is a perfect outlet for his knowledge of race, culture, and behavioral disorders in children.

This book lays out the problem, presents the data, and then challenges our previously held notions. A paper like this is crucial for young scholars to read because it examines the juvenile justice system’s impact on a group of individuals who are not widely known outside of Australia. It also forces academics to really stop and think about the impact of some programs. Do they really help the juveniles, or do they simply give everybody else peace of mind? McCallum challenges readers to think critically and to not become a cog in the wheel by doing things a certain way just because that was how they were always done. It causes readers to expand their thinking and to come up with a better solution for all parties involved and not just for the ones in a position of power.

Using longitudinal data from nearly 3000 students across 113 public schools in Kentucky, the authors attempt to untangle whether there are gendered correlates for weapon carrying and use among middle school students. Overall, the authors found evidence to support gendered theory of weapon carrying/use. The full sample model suggested that there were six significant predictors for weapon carrying (gender, peer attachment, parental attachment, delinquent peers, delinquency, and low self-control); however, when separated into gender-specific models, the correlates were substantially different for males versus females. Significant correlates for females included peer and parental attachment, while males were more impacted by delinquency and low self-control. Association with delinquent peers was a significant predictor for both male and female students. Implications of these findings for the applicability of gendered prevention programs are discussed.