Examining the Role of Demographics in Campus Crime Alerts

Abstract

Colleges and universities are required by the Clery Act to issue crime alerts to members of the campus community. Issuing agencies have significant discretion in the timing and information included in crime alerts, including the perpetrator descriptors. The inclusion of perpetrator/suspect descriptions in the crime alert is intended to maximize public safety. Race descriptors may have negative consequences through the repetition of minority suspect information. To address the issue of demographic use in crime alerts, a mixed method approach was employed. A summary review of several years of crime alerts issued by a large urban university was conducted to assess the role of demographics. Qualitative data were collected through a series of focus groups and interviews addressing the balance of public safety and potential negative perceptions (perpetuated by crime alerts). Reviewed crime alerts indicate that they are largely posted for violent crimes, particularly robbery, armed robbery, and aggravated assault. Perpetrators are overwhelmingly male and largely Black. It is reasonable to question whether repeated descriptions of crime acts committed by Black males could raise, foster, or enhance negative stereotypes. Recommendations for model crime alerts and campus events are included. Consideration of stereotype impacts may influence crime alerts but circumstances and public risk may supersede these concerns.

Keywords

crime alerts race and policing stereotypes criminological theories race and public opinion treatment by the police

Introduction

Recent high-profile encounters with police, particularly revolving around issues of race, have refocused attention to police–citizen encounters. This issue is especially important in urban campuses which are defined by a high population of minority students and are often located in a high-density minority population regions. Criminal acts are therefore frequently perpetrated by minority males and crime alerts, issued by campus law enforcement and required by the Clery Act, draw a recurrent focus to minority crime acts. This repetition of information may produce a variety of adverse consequences.

The cumulative impact of racial discrimination, stereotyping, and micro-aggressions account for the special way many African Americans evaluate and analyze their experience in both citizen–citizen and police–citizen encounters. While a growing interest in racial profiling and policing bias is beneficial to all citizens, this interest is of particular importance to many African American communities. Police–minority interactions and perceptions of each other are complex and multifaceted and African Americans hold a unique, long-standing, and complicated relationship with police and law enforcement. This relationship traces to official and unofficial police patrols historically enforcing unjust laws by monitoring, patrolling, and controlling African Americans (Bass, 2001).

A substantial body of research has investigated the social impact of policing and the disproportionate effects of police procedures and wrongdoing on Black citizens (Bass, 2001; Meehan & Ponder, 2002). These studies detail the diverse injuries to residents of distressed communities, including unparalleled experiences with being watched and detained (Fagan & Davies, 2000; Hurst & Frank, 2000; Jones-Brown, 2000), arrests, the use of unwarranted physical and deadly force, and officer misconduct (Kane, 2002). In addition, the literature also concludes that it is particularly African American men who are disproportionally burdened by these negative experiences (Brunson & Miller, 2006; Hurst & Frank, 2000). Collectively, perceptions of unfair and disrespectful treatment, coupled with high rates of being targeted by the police, likely have a cumulative effect on Black men perception and interaction with the police (Brunson, 2007).

The potential accumulation of negative stereotypes evident in crime alerts may influence perceptions, and actions, of persons from all races. This concern raises research questions regarding the appropriateness of demographics in crime alerts. Law enforcement agencies must balance public safety and negative perceptions. This difficult task mandates consideration of a model crime alert and leads to recommendations for campus communities.

Literature Review

The following review will frame an analysis of racial indicators in campus crime alerts and the potential impact on negative racial stereotypes. The review establishes the foundations of the Clery Act before considering the racial climate on college campuses. The review then details literature on the stereotypes regarding the criminality of African Americans and the balance between trying to mitigate stereotypes while maintaining public safety.

The Clery Act

The Student Right to Know and Campus Security Act of 1990, later renamed the Clery Act, is a piece of federal legislation that was largely influenced by the murder of Lehigh University student Jeanne Clery. She was killed while in her dormitory—a building which had security issues that the school administration did not disclose to the campus community. In response to a push for improved campus security and transparency of campus crime issues, the Clery Act requires that colleges and universities produce an annual report detailing their campus security policies and annual crime statistics. It contains a number of other requirements, as well, including that colleges provide timely notifications of crimes that represent a threat to the campus community (Carter & Bath, 2007).

A number of studies have analyzed various elements of the Clery Act. These studies have found that students and parents are largely unaware of it and thus do not read the annual security report (Aliabadi, 2007; Janosik, 2004; Janosik & Gehring, 2003; Janosik & Plummer, 2005), and crime statistics have little influence on prospective students’ college decisions (Aliabadi, 2007; Gehring & Callaway, 1997; Parkinson, 2001). The Clery Act is also seen as largely symbolic (Fisher, Hartman, Cullen, & Turner, 2002) in that administrators do not think that it does much to reduce campus crime (Gregory & Janosik, 2003; Janosik & Gregory, 2003a). Other studies have found that most institutions do not properly apply it (Kerr, 2001; McGuire, 2002), and it encourages the underreporting of campus crime (Sloan, Fisher, & Cullen, 1997). Few studies have focused specifically on Clery Act crime alerts, but Aliabadi’s (2007) interviews with college students revealed that participants scanned alerts in search of specific information, such as the location and severity of the crime. Hernandez’s (2013) interviews with a small group of Latino students revealed that participants felt crime alerts focus largely on the race of offenders, which fosters perceptions among students that African American males frequently commit the campus crimes.

Racial Climate on College Campuses

The possible negative ramifications that arise from racial indicators in crime alerts are heightened when considering the hostile racial climate often present on college campuses. In the early 1990s, Hurtado (1992) discovered a disturbing amount of perceived racial conflict present in higher education. For example, minority students are more likely to perceive their campus climate as racist (Rankin & Reason, 2005). African American students in particular have largely negative perceptions of the campus climate (D’Augelli & Hershberger, 1993; Fischer, 2007; Pieterse, Carter, Evans, & Walter, 2010; Reid & Radhakrishnan, 2003), which can inhibit academic performance (Fischer, 2010). Numerous quantitative analyses indicate that African American students report more racially driven conflict experiences on campus than students of other races (Ancis, Sedlacek, & Mohr, 2000; D’Augelli & Hershberger, 1993; Pieterse et al., 2010; Reid & Radhakrishnan, 2003), including unequal treatment from faculty members (Ancis et al., 2000). This racial climate can undermine overall satisfaction with the collegiate experience (Fischer, 2010), negatively impact commitment to the university (Cabrera, Nora, Terenzini, Pascarella, & Hagedorn, 1999), and increase the likelihood of students leaving (Fischer, 2007). Fischer (2010) argued that lackluster academic performance among African American students could be explained by the theory of stereotype threat, where they suffer from additional pressure to outperform stereotypes of inadequate intelligence.

Qualitative studies have investigated race issues on college campuses by analyzing the role of racial microaggressions in the campus climate. Participants in these studies describe a wealth of racial microaggressions that create a hostile and unwelcoming campus climate (Smith, Allen, & Danley, 2007; Solorzano, Ceja, & Yosso, 2000). Collegiate social settings appear to contain more overt racism than academic settings (Solorzano et al., 2000), which are often exhibited by White students displaying feelings of fear and contempt when African Americans are present in historically White public spaces (Smith et al., 2007). These social dilemmas are compounded when normal behavior by African American students is more likely to be defined as deviant (Smith et al., 2007). Participants detailed the psychological impact of racial microaggressions, which include frustration, anger, aggression, isolation, exhaustion, and self-doubt (Smith et al., 2007; Solorzano et al., 2000). This hostile racial climate on college campuses is an important factor to consider when recognizing the potential for crime alerts to perpetuate negative racial stereotypes. If these alerts frequently identify minorities as the suspected offenders, the hostile aspects of the campus racial climate may continue to strengthen.

Perceptions of Minority Criminality Tendencies

Negative racial stereotypes can be a dangerous aspect of American culture, especially if they are continually perpetuated. The racial stereotype regarding African Americans being criminal and dangerous has existed for years in American culture (Hawkins, 1995; Kennedy, 1997). The media and entertainment industry has fueled this stereotype by continually depicting African American men as violent offenders (Bjornstrom, Kaufman, Peterson, & Slater, 2010; Bogle, 2001; Dixon & Linz, 2000; Jackson, 2006; Oliver, 2003). This stereotype has gained strength due to the disproportionate number of African Americans that have become entrenched in the criminal justice system (Cole, 1999; Steffensmeier, Ulmer, & Kramer, 1998). These stereotypes have played out in studies that have continually discovered a positive relationship between actual (Covington & Tyler, 1991; Drakulich, 2009; Myers & Chung, 1998; Oh & Kim, 2009; Quillian & Pager, 2001; Snell, 2001; Taylor & Covington, 1993) or perceived (Chiricos, Hogan, & Gertz, 1997; Chiricos, McEntire, & Gertz, 2001; Moeller, 1989; Pickett, Chiricos, Golden, & Getz, 2012; Skogan, 1995) increased proportions of African American residents and perceived increased crime victimization risks, even when controlling for actual crime rates (Quillian & Pager, 2001).

Racial factors continue to be important in individuals formulating crime risk perceptions despite other indicators, such as economic factors, being more predictive of actual crime risks (Quillian & Pager, 2001, 2010). It is important to recognize that perception is a dynamic term. In this study, perception refers to a by-product of a decision an individual makes in terms of the assumed likelihood of something occurring, or in this case, an assumption that increased amounts of minorities are linked to an increased likelihood of crime occurring. Tversky and Kahneman (1974) explained this as individuals utilizing a cognitive shortcut to estimate the likelihood of an event occurring despite having limited information. In addition, White individuals have reported higher levels of fear when encountering African Americans in public (St. John & Heald-Moore, 1996; Staples, 1992). Negative racial stereotypes can also impact individuals recognizing crime, as Drakulich (2012) found that individuals living in more racially diverse neighborhoods were more likely to recognize signs of disorder in their neighborhood. Eberhardt, Goff, Purdie, and Davis (2004) also found that participants were more likely to recognize crime-related, degraded images after seeing the faces of African American individuals. A natural externality of these findings is that minorities committing crime, even more trivial crime, are more likely to be identified as committing a crime and then reported to law enforcement officials. This would naturally lead to minorities’ criminal acts being reported to law enforcement officials at higher rates than White individuals’ criminal acts.

Negative racial stereotypes may generate a number of dangerous consequences. Individuals faced with negative stereotypes tend to perform poorly on various measures, and they can suffer from a number of lingering effects, such as aggression, hostility, overeating, and poor academic performance (Inzlicht & Kang, 2010). Stereotypes can also become a self-fulfilling prophecy, which is exemplified when African American students face heightened levels of anxiety because they want to avoid conforming to negative intellectual stereotypes, and this anxiety negatively influences student performance (“News and Views”, 1999). Racial discrimination in general could potentially bring about trauma-related symptoms (Pieterse et al., 2010), and the ramifications arising from negative racial stereotypes extend beyond immediate effects as well. For example, employers considering the risk that comes with potential hires could be influenced by negative racial stereotypes (Quillian & Pager, 2010). Despite their many flaws and distortions of reality (Mackie, Hamilton, Susskind, & Rosselli, 1996), stereotypes are very resistant to change (Kunda & Oleson, 1995). Perhaps one of the most well-known by-products of this particular negative racial stereotype has been depicted in the use of racial profiling in policing.

Racial Profiling in Policing

A clear consequence of the perpetuation of the stereotype that Africans Americans are more likely to be criminal exists in the realm of policing. Racial profiling, whether implicit or explicit, has been a common practice in American policing, and it arises from stereotypes depicting African Americans as more criminal and dangerous than individuals of other races (Glaser, 2004). This is commonly validated in the exaggerated rate at which African American men are stopped for questioning and arrested when compared to White individuals (Hayle, Wortley, & Tanner, 2014; White, 2014). This targeting of African Americans is multiplied when individuals who appear more “black” are a greater target of Black racial stereotypes (Blair, Judd, & Chapleau, 2004), which further increased perceived criminality by police officers (Eberhardt et al., 2004) and can even impact the criminal sentencing of the individual (Blair et al., 2004). Negative racial stereotypes can be difficult to separate from other signs of suspicious behavior because stereotypes often operate outside of individuals’ consciousness (Banaji & Greenwald, 1995). When stereotypes regarding the criminality of African Americans are ingrained in officers’ minds, even the most well-intentioned officers may operate in a biased manner (Eberhardt et al., 2004; Glaser, 2004).

The negative impacts of racial profiling on citizens, and African Americans in particular, have been well documented. Racial profiling combined with aggressive policing and highly punitive sentencing policies has been a major contributor to Black men being overrepresented in various stages of the criminal justice system (Glaser, 2004). The overrepresentation in the criminal justice system impacts African Americans both with and without criminal records, especially in areas such as employment (Pager, 2003). Racial profiling inevitably leads to more innocent African Americans being stopped by the police, which can have a stigmatizing effect, cause disenfranchisement, and inhibit public trust of law enforcement (Glaser, 2004). Profiling techniques are prone to creating false-positives, which can further stigmatize individuals and deprive them of their civil liberties (Randazzo et al., 2006). Profiling also skews criminal justice statistics, which are used to inform policy decisions and can further harbor discrimination (Glaser, 2004). Studies continue to find that this racial profiling is played out in police automobile stops, as law enforcement officers are more likely to stop Black drivers than White drivers (Bell, Hopson, Craig, & Robinson, 2014; Lundman & Kaufman, 2003), which has resulted in Black drivers being fearful of being pulled over and then hoping to survive the interaction with law enforcement (Bell et al., 2014). Fridell and Lim (2016) analyzed use-of-force incidents by police officers and found that the implicit-bias perspective was more likely to explain police behavior than the counter bias perspective, which means that officer bias is likely to produce a greater tendency to use force against African American citizens. The history of racial profiling in policing has helped fuel distrust in police among the African American community (Lasley, 1994; Tyler, 2005) and hurt police favorability ratings among African Americans as well (Engel, 2005; Wu, Sun, & Triplett, 2009).

It is evident that the further perpetuation of negative racial stereotypes brings about a number of issues, which is depicted in how these stereotypes have fueled racial profiling in policing, and the subsequent impact this practice has had on the African American community. The ability for racial identifiers in crime alerts to perpetuate negative racial stereotypes and produce subsequent problems must be juxtaposed against the notion that these physical identifiers help improve public safety.

Gap in the Research

The literature is replete with studies focused upon racial tensions present on college campuses, the negative stereotypes regarding race and criminality, and the dangers of allowing these stereotypes to proliferate. The literature describing the impact of campus crime alerts on negative stereotypes, and the many consequences that follow, has yet to develop. This study will seek to fill this gap in the research and begin a needed inquiry into whether crime alerts that include racial identifiers play a role in the perpetuation of negative racial stereotypes and, if so, how that impacts members of the campus community. Colleges and universities have flexibility regarding the information included in Clery campus crime alerts. The results from this study can help colleges and universities determine whether racial identifiers are an essential component of crime alerts for purposes of public safety, or if they create unintended consequences that warrant a discussion of their necessity.

Method

Setting

This research was conducted at a large urban university populated by approximately 30,000 students, 2000 faculty, and 2000 staff and personnel. The university is situated in a city of approximately 200,000 residents in the mid-Atlantic region of the United States. The metropolitan statistical area is approximately 1.25 million persons. The university has two campuses—the primary campus serves the majority of students and the medical campus is located a couple of miles away, still in the downtown portion of the city. There are nearly 6,000 residential spots on the two campuses. Additionally, the medical campus has one of the largest hospitals in the state. The main campus is located in a region of the city populated by small and large businesses, housing oriented toward students, and several neighborhoods in the vicinity of the university are largely minority and of lower socioeconomic status.

Student demographics are reported on the university website. Approximately 42% of students are male and 57% are female. Just over half (51%) are White, 15% are Black/African American, 12% are Asian, 7% are Latino, and the remaining 15% are a combination of international, multiple races, or unknown.

The university police department has nearly 100 sworn personnel, employs approximately 250 security personnel (a combination of full and part time employees), has an independent emergency communications center, and utilizes an on-site training academy. The department is one of the largest campus police agencies in the United States.

The issue of race, and relations subsequent to race, is an important one on the campus. As an urban university, part of the school’s mission is to study and address issues of race and community/student interaction. Discussions of race on campus are frequent and generally supported by the administration. There have been no major conflicts surrounding race issues in the past 5 years although there have been a number of conversations on treatment of minorities at the university. There are several student minority organizations that are quite active.

Populations

The research question to be studied in this project regards the perceived impact of crime alerts issued by the police department (as required by the Clery Act). Additionally, we sought recommendations for possible revisions to current crime alert practices regarding the employment of race descriptors. To acquire multiple perspectives, qualitative data were collected from a series of focus groups. The selection of these groups was driven by several goals. The first goal was to gain participation from several populations, including students, faculty and staff, and subject matter experts. The second goal was to engage participants who had knowledge of issues related to race and crime, either experiential or through their area of study. The third goal in selecting these groups was to find participants willing to discuss these always complicated and sometimes heated topics. Qualitative research is predicated on an active dialogue and recalcitrant participants provide limited data.

Minority student organization members: Researchers conducted a session with members of a Black student association. This session was hosted by the Office of Multi-Cultural Affairs with a specific focus on the perceptions of race and crime engendered by crime alerts. Approximately 35 students participated in this discussion. They were overwhelmingly African American/Black with a few Asian and Caucasian participants. The focus group followed a semi-structured format with a list of pre-hoc constructs and the flexibility to follow emerging discussion themes.

Criminal justice student organization members: Researchers conducted a session with members of a student criminal justice organization. The session was organized by student leaders of the association with the specified topic of discussing race and crime. A significant portion of the discussion was devoted to crime alerts and the potential and perceived impacts of crime alerts. Approximately 30 students participated representing an array of race and ethnic backgrounds. The focus group followed a semi-structured format with a list of pre-hoc constructs and the flexibility to follow emerging discussion themes.

Criminal Justice graduate students: A focus group with 12 criminal justice graduate students, enrolled in a graduate-level policing class, was conducted following a semi-structured format. Most of the participants have undergraduate degrees in criminal justice and were knowledgeable about the field. Approximately two third were female and one quarter were African American (the rest were White).

Faculty and staff: A convenience sample of eight faculty and staff were interviewed following a semi-structured interview format. They included persons from a variety of racial backgrounds, tenure at the university, and positions.

Subject matter experts: A convenience sample of subject matter experts were interviewed by the principal investigator. Eight scholars studying race and/or policing were questioned following a semi-structured interview approach. Each scholar is a full-time faculty member at a university or college and is actively conducting research on the intersection of race and law enforcement issues. They were selected based on their expertise and willingness to discuss the topic. They were identified following a review of authorship in scholarly journals on issues of race, crime, and policing. Some, but not all, are minority faculty members. The perspective of subject matter experts is useful in this research as they are able to frame findings in the broader scholarly literature and relative to the field of criminal justice. Their understanding of police responsibilities, system and community expectations, and the law (such as the Clery Act) provided an important contrast with interested but nonexpert student, faculty, and staff perspectives.

It is important to note that these groups were selected to fulfill the previously described methodological goals, but they represent several convenience samples. As such, they should not be considered representative of the broader university population. This study was reviewed and approved by the university institutional review board, and all participants were afforded appropriate protections.

Summary of Participants

Approximately 80 students participated in a series of focus groups to discuss the importance of race, policing, and crime alerts. Student participants were disposed to an interest in the subject based on their course of study and/or student organization participation. University faculty and staff participants represent an important element of the campus community and provided a nonstudent perspective. Subject matter experts offered valuable contributions, grounded in the current research and literature on the topic. All students, faculty, staff, and subject matter experts participated in a voluntary fashion, received no compensation for participation, and were assured confidentiality.

Sample Size

Qualitative data were collected through a series of focus groups and interviews. A total of three focus groups were conducted—one with 35 undergraduate students, one with 30 undergraduate students, and one with 12 graduate students. These are larger than the typical focus groups which warrant consideration and explanation.

Several texts are available which provide guidance on sample size in focus groups (see e.g., Kitzinger, 1995; Krueger & Casey, 2009; Morgan, 1997). Recommen-dations generally advocate 4–12 participants in a focus group, although there are no proscribed limits. Carlsen and Glenton (2011), in a review of health-care focus group research, found sample sizes as high as 96, although that number was standard deviations from the median of 8. The current study utilized existing student organizations and meetings as forums for discussions, which resulted in focus group sizes larger than ideal. Future research on this topic should utilize a more rigorous (and likely more impactful) sampling framework and limit focus group membership.

Qualitative Data Collection

Focus groups and interviews followed a semi-structured approach in which constructs and questions were identified pre-hoc (based on a review of relevant scholarly literature). These questions were then posed to participants, responses and answers were collected by researchers, and themes and relevant tangents could be explored to fruition. In the two largest focus groups (with the student association participants), a lead discussant was identified (the principal investigator), and a notetaker was responsible for collecting data (via written notes). This dual researcher approach provided one person with the opportunity to pose questions and one person to fully attend to data collection. No qualitative data were recorded, given the inflammatory nature of the topic.

The constructs tapped across all five populations were similar, although question phrasing varied slightly based on the nature of the setting (focus group or interview) and the flow of the semi-structured approach. With each population, the constructs assessed included:

familiarity with crime alerts,

utilization and reading of crime alerts,

understanding of the role and purpose of crime alerts,

information necessary in a crime alert (i.e. suspect description),

importance of race information in a crime alert,

value of suspect details and demographic descriptors,

balance of public safety with perception of the community, particularly minorities, relative to inclusion of race in crime alerts, and

possible alternatives to inclusion of race and demographics in crime alerts.

These constructs attempted to assess participants’ perceptions of crime alerts, the utility of including race in crime alerts, possible negative consequences of racial bias and perpetuation of stereotypes, and reasonable alternatives to including race and other demographics in issued crime alerts.

Qualitative Data Analysis

Analysis of data collected through qualitative means is frequently described as a “black box” where information enters and some poorly articulated analysis produces findings and results (Schiellerup, 2008). In the social sciences, data collected qualitatively is (ideally) subjected to a structured coding and analysis procedure (Chowdhury, 2015), often done with software such as Atlas, NVivo, or a similar system (Schiellerup, 2008). This is predicated on the presumption that data can be coded, which is usually done with transcribed interviews or focus group sessions. Interviews and focus groups in this project were not recorded for several reasons. The volatile nature of the topic may have limited participation or honesty among participants. Two of the sessions were conducted with large groups (around 30 participants) and recording these discussions would have been difficult from a technical standpoint. Researchers asked participants to critique a policy of the university which they attended, or for faculty and staff or their employer. Participants may have been worried about ramifications if a recorded interview were distributed. For these reasons, researchers decided not to record interviews, despite the reduction in data quality, in pursuit of honest responding.

Since transcribed interviews are not available for this research, analytic techniques that are predicated on theme identification and data reduction were considered. Oun and Bach (2014) suggest recursive abstraction as an alternative to coding techniques—an appropriate option, given the limitations of the data. Recursive abstraction is a formalized process of organizing, condensing, and summarizing data, leading to the emergence of themes. After organizing qualitative findings in a spreadsheet, data are paraphrased and condensed, then ordered around extant themes. While this approach loses the rigor of coded processes, it does allow researchers to connect disparate ideas conceptually. Recursive abstraction, much like grounded theory design, is particularly useful with new and understudied research topics

Crime Alert Descriptive Data

All crime alerts from late 2011–2015 were collected and analyzed. These data were provided by the University Police Department. This span was not selected arbitrarily—crime alerts were issued electronically starting in August 2011 by the incoming police chief.

Results

The key question under investigation in this project is the utility of demographic data, particularly race, in crime alerts, relative to any negative perceptions or the possible perpetuation of stereotypes. Qualitative data were collected via interviews and focus groups from five populations, including university students and members of several student associations, faculty and staff, and subject matter experts. Additionally, all crime alerts issued since late 2011 were collected and reviewed. The following sections detail the findings from these data.

Crime Alert Descriptive Data

All Clery Act report files generated by the university police department were reviewed, encompassing the time period of August 2011 through December of 2015, or approximately 4½ years. Crime alerts were not issued for all Clery Act files—a determination is made by police administrators regarding the urgency of the act and a crime alert is posted (via e-mail to all faculty, students, and staff). Agency decision makers were questioned on the decision-making process they employ when issuing crime alerts. While there is some subjectivity in the process, issuance decision-making is subsequent to several agency guidelines. Crime alerts are issued for virtually all violent crimes, particularly those that are ongoing. Crime alerts are posted within hours, usually less than 1 hr, of the notification to the agency. Sex crimes are reviewed under a different set of guidelines as there are special risks of victim identification and many reported sex crimes are not reported until well after the victimization occurred. Crime alerts are rarely posted for property crimes. Since the purpose of the crime alert is to inform the campus community on potential safety risks, violent crimes represent the bulk of all crime alerts.

A total of 104 crime alerts were issued during the period described. While there were noncrime alerts issued, they revolve around weather and environmental issues (i.e., flooded building) and were therefore not considered in this review. Table 1 summarizes the criminal acts involving those crime alerts.

Table 1.

Crime Alert Criminal Acts.

Criminal Act	Frequency
Armed robbery	23
Robbery	33
Aggravated assault	14
Sexual assault	16
Burglary/theft	9
Shots fired	4
Other (One each: arson, abduction, bomb threat, trespass)	4

Race was included in 83 of the issued crime alerts, or, omitted in 21. When race was noted, it was overwhelmingly Black or African American. In 14 cases the suspects were described as White and in 1 the suspect was described as either Asian or Latino/Hispanic. Suspects were also mostly male, with only four occurrences of female suspects.

Qualitative Findings

Black/African American student association

This session was moderated by the principal investigator and a doctoral research assistant took notes. The following subjects were discussed and key findings for each of these subjects are presented.

Understanding of Crime Alerts—Virtually all student participants indicated familiarity with the e-mailed crime alerts. Most students noted that they regularly read them, understand their purpose, and recognize that they are intended to enhance public safety. When asked why the crime alerts are sent, some students suggested that they are required by law. Students questioned whether the crime alerts are intended to serve an informational/notification purpose of past events or events in progress. A discussion ensued regarding the role of crime alerts relative to immediate public safety.

Role of Demographics in Crime Alerts—A substantial portion of the discussion revolved around the use of demographics in crime alerts, particularly race. Most students acknowledged that race, and other personal descriptors, should be included in crime alerts if they can assist in furthering public safety. A number of questions were posed to gain clarity on this broad concept. Most students felt that describing perpetrators as young Black males was redundant and furthered a criminalistics stereotype. The redundancy of minimal descriptions, limited to race or general clothing, automatically makes an entire population a target. Generic descriptors were viewed negatively by the participants. For example, one participant opined that a description of a young Black male in jeans and a white shirt could include hundreds of people on campus. Looking around the room, several participants fit that description. Specific descriptors, which could significantly differentiate persons, were lauded. Examples of very specific clothing, athletic designations, or unusual colors (of clothing) were cited as differentiating characteristics.

Balance of Public Safety Versus Perception—Participants largely favored public safety needs over the perpetuation of stereotypes. They raised concerns about the ramifications of repeated negative portrayal of young Black males. Participants agreed that contextualized descriptors could enhance public safety and therefore should absolutely be included. There was little consensus regarding specificity in demographic inclusion in crime alerts, however, there was consensus regarding the pressing nature of some crime alerts and the totality of the circumstances. That is, in an active event or in situations where information could enhance instant public safety, any information is relevant. While there is subjectivity in these determinations, the totality of the circumstances (or the urgency of the situation) should govern the release of the information.

Emergent Themes:

Race descriptors have a place in crime alerts if, given the totality of the circumstances, they can enhance instant public safety and/or include differentiating characteristics.

When no differentiating characteristics are available and a generic descriptor is the only option, concerns regarding the negative perpetuation of stereotypes outweigh slight benefits.

Alternative race descriptors (such as light, medium, dark complexion) were viewed negatively as they do not effectively distinguish between persons.

Participants suggested that the university should engage in events and activities to refute negative race and criminal stereotypes.

Crime alerts could also include information that provide object and location lessons to help students avoid potential future criminal victimization.

When considering the balance between public safety and the potential negative impact of race patterns on crime alerts, most participants seemed to align with the importance of public safety.

Tension exists between members of minorities and persons in authority, particularly police, as some minority persons feel police target them simply because of their skin color. Several anecdotes relating to this perception were noted by participants, highlighting the importance of addressing stereotypes.

Criminal Justice student organization session

An organization of criminal justice students scheduled a meeting to discuss current issues in policing, particularly around race. The principal investigator led the discussion and spent much of that time in conversation with student members regarding crime alerts, perceptions of race, and stereotypes. Students were primarily undergraduate criminal justice majors with a few graduate students. They were ethnically diverse and represented a variety of ages.

Understanding of Crime Alerts—Virtually all students indicated they regularly receive and read e-mailed crime alerts. A few students indicated they usually ignore or delete them. Since this participant population has a specific interest in criminal justice, it was expected that they read and follow crime alerts.

Role of Demographics in Crime Alerts—Participants stated that demographics, and any other data, should be included in crime alerts. Several students noted that most crime alerts have scant information which they attributed to the general failures of victims and witnesses in observing perpetrator information. Students argued for expansion of available information in crime alerts.

Balance of Public Safety Versus Perception—Student participants generally preferred that all available information be included in crime alerts. Since crime alerts represent ongoing, or recently completed events, they felt that any demographic data (including race) could benefit the community. They conceded that inclusion of race could adversely impact the self-perception, and perceptions by others, of minority males.

Emergent Themes:

Inclusion of all available information on suspects/perpetrators, including pictures if they are available (via security cameras). Pictures could be included in crime alerts or provided in a separate link.

This population of criminal justice students, many of them minority, favored public safety over potential negative perceptions of stereotypes. They advocated the use of other descriptors when available but recognize that information limitations govern crime alerts.

While they expressed concerns regarding the impact of negative stereotypes on young minority males, they suggested that crime data are based on information reported to police and, in some urban settings, a disproportionate number of criminals are minority males.

Some minority participants indicated that distrust exists between persons of minority background and police. This tension highlights the importance of addressing the perpetuation of negative stereotypes and potential cognitive bias.

Faculty and Staff Interviews

A convenience sample of eight faculty and staff were interviewed by a member of the research team (a public policy doctoral student). All interviews followed a semi-structured format with pre-hoc questions and the flexibility to follow interesting themes. Interviews lasted between 30 and 45 min, were not recorded, and note were taken by the interviewer.

Understanding of Crime Alerts—Participants were familiar with crime alerts and understood their purpose regarding the safety of the campus community. Participants ranged widely in their attentiveness to crime alerts—some read all alerts, some skim them.

Role of Demographics in Crime Alerts—Most participants felt that inclusion of race could perpetuate a negative perception of minorities, particularly Black males. The majority of participants felt that there are already negative perceptions attributed to the stereotype of a young Black male and the crime alerts often contribute to that perception. The repetition of “young Black male” in the crime alerts serves to reinforce previously held beliefs of the public, according to most of the faculty and staff participants.

Balance of Public Safety Versus Perception—When an incident is ongoing, or there is a clear continuing risk to the public, participants felt that all available information should be included. When an incident has occurred and there is little or no present threat, most participants in the faculty and staff interviews contended that inclusion of race had a detrimental impact. They recognize that the police are simply sharing information made available to them by victims or witnesses, however, several expressed concerns about possible impacts on African American male students.

Emergent Themes

There was little consensus from a convenience sample of faculty and staff regarding the inclusion of race in crime alerts. Some saw no negative impact, some saw a potential detriment but felt public safety outweighed that impact, while some felt that inclusion of race was an unfortunate practice except in ongoing incidents.

Several participants advised that race be excluded in cases which are several hours old and there are no pressing public safety concerns. Similarly, they suggested that other demographics (such as clothing/attire) could be used in lieu of race.

A few participants seemed resigned to negative perceptions of race irrespective of crime alerts, or any action taken relative to changing crime alerts. Given the demographic distribution of students, attention paid to race issues, stereotypes, and equality of perceptions would be welcomed.

Criminal Justice Graduate Students

A convenience sample of graduate students in the criminal justice program, all enrolled in a policing class, were engaged in a discussion on crime alerts. One class session was devoted to a consideration of race issues and a portion of that class addressed stereotypes, potential negative consequences of perceptions, and public safety concerns. Students enrolled in this class have a variety of criminal justice backgrounds, many of them are currently employed in criminal justice, most have undergraduate degrees in the social sciences, and several were minority students.

Understanding of Crime Alerts—This advanced student population was keenly aware of the purpose, role, and process of crime alerts, noting the Clery Act and the university’s obligation to report crime data. Several also mentioned the annual police survey. Most indicated they regularly read crime alert notifications and some said that crime alerts have influenced their behavior.

Role of Demographics in Crime Alerts—Students suggested that all available information is relevant for members of the campus community and should be included in crime alerts. They questioned the accuracy of victim and witness recall and suggested that, if there is uncertainty, information could be reported but with a confidence indicator.

Balance of Safety Versus Perception—Given their knowledge of policing, students expressed potential negative ramifications regarding the disenfranchisement of minority students. These negative impacts could affect community relations and long-term career choices of minority males. They also focused attention on the perceptions of police—if officers are accustomed to viewing minority males as likely criminals, that perception may influence the persons approached by officers (and conversely the persons they do not approach). Further, the manner of approach will be influenced by perceptions as officers may view minority males as more suspect and more dangerous. Potential negative stereotype impacts were also considered. Students noted that many of the criminals are likely not students and instead come onto campus seeking a target population.

Emergent Themes:

Students advocated inclusion of all available information, even if that information is incomplete or suspect.

Participants advocated publishing outcome and follow-up information, including closure rate of incidences for which crime alerts are issued.

They noted the potential negative consequences of perpetuating race stereotypes on students, faculty/staff, and university police officers.

Subject Matter Experts

A convenience sample of eight scholars and subject matter experts were contacted regarding crime alerts. Participants were selected based on their research on the intersection of race and policing issues. The questions posed to them were similar to those asked of other participants.

Understanding of Crime Alerts—All respondents were aware of the Clery Act and the requirement for dutiful notification by campus authorities regarding criminal acts. They noted that there is significant subjectivity in these notifications. When the university system was described, most respondents observed that this approach provides more information that other crime alerts and seems to err on the side of public safety.

Role of Demographics in Crime Alerts—The subject matter experts observed that inclusion of all available information addressed issues of public safety and were particularly important given the urgency associated with ongoing, or recent, criminal acts. Some asked whether failing to include cogent demographic data (predicated on that information being reliable) would raise liability issues if that perpetrator committed another crime which could have been avoided. Participants noted that if victim and/or witness statements are not reliable, or not specific, a qualifier could accompany the information in the crime alert release.

Balance of Safety Versus Perception—Respondents differed on this issue. All recognized the potential for perpetuation of negative perceptions of minority members. Several raised the issue of disproportionate minority contact, reflecting that crime alerts could perpetuate a negative cycle of views and actions. Some suggested that crime alerts could influence the perceptions of students, university community members (like faculty and staff), and police officers. Conversely, some scholars noted the police responsibility to advocate for public safety and contended that suppressing available information, even for a broad public good, raised ethical and liability issues.

Emergent Themes—When asked for recommendations on the crime alert process regarding negative racial stereotypes, subject matter experts offered several thoughts:

Failing to provide relevant information that could protect public safety might raise ethical and liability issues

Although cognizant of the potential for negative impact, racial stereotypes are an artifact of individual offending and reflect the actions of specific individuals.

Rather than trying to obfuscate existing information, proactive steps that reduce victimization possibilities should be undertaken.

Engaging university community members, particularly minorities, in the coproduction of community safety can also have positive impacts.

Refutations of negative stereotypes, provided by campus media personnel, could also counteract the possible risk of crime alert impacts.

Summary of Qualitative Findings

A review of the qualitative results indicates several themes consistent across each of the populations. First, virtually all populations endorse the importance of public safety and agreed that public safety needs supersede other concerns. Most participants agreed (to varying degrees) that repeated depiction of minorities in crime alerts can produce, or perpetuate, negative stereotypes. Viewing young Black males as a threat is the most likely consequence of frequent adverse portrayal in crime alerts. The totality of the circumstances, however, defines the public safety needs which should be considered in the issuance of a crime alert. In other words, when there is an eminent threat all available information is relevant.

Using race, and any other demographics, in crime alerts is a perfectly reasonable piece of information when further crime or victimization is possible or when differentiating characteristics are available. Generic descriptors that do not differentiate a suspect may not be particularly useful and may simply garner fear of a population as opposed to fostering caution of a specific person.

A number of student participants, particularly minority students, raised concerns regarding selective enforcement and differential treatment (of minorities) by law enforcement. Recent violent events and personal experiences were noted to support this general sense of distrust. Several anecdotes related by participants were both compelling and disturbing. Their expectation of differential targeting and treatment by law enforcement was described with frustration. Participants were keenly aware that race is a critical factor in criminality but resent being labeled as a potential criminal due to race or gender. While these feelings were not directed toward a specific agency (such as the university or a local police department), they reflect a suspicion held by some members of minority communities that police treatment is influenced by race.

The police hold responsibility for public safety and must make decisions on the integrity of victim/witness statements in the issuance, and information provided, regarding crime alerts. The process of balancing public safety with community perceptions is admittedly difficult. Most participants agreed that, in that calculus, the police should err on the side of public safety. They should also, however, be cognizant of negative stereotypes.

Model Crime Alert

Participants were asked to make recommendations and suggestions regarding the crime alert process, particularly relevant to the utility of demographics and public perceptions. Alternatives were offered and can be employed to define a “model” or ideal crime alert.

The ideal crime alert is issued by university public safety quickly (no later than 2–4 hr, preferably within 1 hr) of the event and is predicated on suspect, witness, or camera data. Not all crime alerts need to include demographic data—a car theft or property crime event likely has no usable demographic descriptors. In a personal violent crime (i.e. robbery or aggravated assault) that is several hours old, including demographic data are unlikely to enhance public safety unless there are differentiating elements that demark the perpetrators relative to the broad population. When there is an active or ongoing incident, or indicators that repeat victimization is likely, any available demographic or descriptors should be included.

An alternative to the inclusion of demographic data in crime alerts is to provide a clickable link if readers want to see any available suspect provided description. This approach fulfills the obligation of the Clery Act while allowing persons to make a conscious decision to review demographics. It also indicates that the demographic information available is provided by victims/witnesses or surveillance cameras (specifying the source could also be advantageous). This could also include pictures when available—an increasingly likely possibility, given the proliferation of surveillance cameras and personal devices (such as cell phones).

Some participants felt that crime alerts did not carry enough information, particularly regarding victimization prevention and outcomes. Follow-up information could also be provided in a separate website. Students are interested in the outcome of the incidents that mandate crime alerts. An annual crime alert report, summarizing the number, nature, and outcomes of crime alerts, could be posted on the university police website. These outcome reports would also be useful in victimization avoidance. If campus community members see patterns in crimes, they may alter their behavior to avoid victimization.

Conclusion

The issuance of crime alerts is required by the Clery Act, but colleges and universities have significant discretion regarding the delivery of that information and the details that must be included. The university police post crime alerts as quickly as possible and include available information with the intention of enhancing public safety and protecting the university community. Concerns were raised, however, regarding the perpetuation of negative stereotypes, given the overwhelming occurrence of minority males described as suspects and offenders in the crime alerts.

This project was conducted to inform decision makers regarding the utility and implications of including race in crime alerts. Through a review of crime alerts encompassing 4½ years, a series of qualitative data collection efforts, and an analysis of the Clery Act, a number of conclusions and implications were drawn. Recommendations for a model crime alert, which addresses public safety but also considers potential perpetuation of negative stereotypes, were proposed.

The potential for negative perceptions, reinforced by crime alerts, suggests that the campus community should consider activities, events, narratives, and initiatives which counter the portrayal of young minority males as criminals. These positive depictions can counter negative stereotypes and can include students, student-athletes, community members, or community leaders as examples of minority males that are not criminals. This is particularly important during a time of problematic police community relations exemplified by recent protests and complaints directed toward police treatment of minorities.

Limitations

There are a number of important methodological limitations to the research design, sampling approach, and data collection. The samples were largely convenience samples and are therefore not to be considered representative of the university community, student, faculty, staff, or otherwise. This limits the generalizability of the findings—that is, findings should not be generalized beyond those participating in this project. The views of participants may have been shaped by individual experiences. Since some participants were members of a minority student association, they may have entered the discussion with strong perspectives on police treatment of minorities. These perceptions may have been exacerbated by recent high-profile events such as those in Ferguson, MO and Baltimore, MD. Some participants may have direct or indirect experience with the criminal justice system which could influence their conceptualization of policing, race, and community relations. Collecting and assessing these experiences and their impacts is virtually impossible, however, we recognize they exist and know they may sway views in an important fashion.

Qualitative data collection approaches, such as focus groups and interviews, are subject to several distinct methodological problems. Findings may be influenced by the researchers via the questions posed, phrasing of the questions, or themes selected and explored. Since many of the participants were students, and the principal investigator was a faculty member, some participants may have been reluctant to voice honest perspectives for fear of possible negative repercussions or may have dissembled in the pursuit of favoritism. Interviews and focus groups discussions were not recorded due to the complex nature of discussions on race—the authors were concerned that recording discussions would adversely impact honesty in responses. Thus, an admittedly inferior system (handwritten notes as opposed to transcribed recordings) represents data. Despite these limitations, the findings may be instructive as examples and anecdotes and recommendations may be considered in policy decisions.

Future Research

The study of race and crime alerts is framed in a broader discussion of police community relations, police discretion, and citizen perceptions. Future research should address the utility of crime alerts in the prevention of crime and how they influence the behavior of campus community members. Survey data of students, faculty, staff, and other college and university personnel would indicate usage and review of crime alert data and perceptual impact of demographics. Qualitative data collected under more rigorous and structured approaches (particularly recorded, transcribed, and coded) would further develop this emerging area of research. Controlled setting studies (such as a social psychology lab) contrasting different types of crime alerts, containing different kinds of demographic descriptors, followed by evaluation of perceptions, could demonstrate whether crime alerts represent a priming agent influencing broad race perceptions.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Authors received financial support from Virginia Commonwealth University to collect these data as part of an internal assessment effort. Authors did not receive support for the authorship and publication of this article.

References

Aliabadi

(2007). Understanding the effects of the Clery Act on college students’ behaviors: How can student affairs professionals change the current practices of college students with regards to safety. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.

Ancis

J. R.

Sedlacek

W. E.

Mohr

J. J.

(2000). Student perceptions of campus cultural climate by race. Journal of Counseling and Development, 78, 180–185.

Banaji

M. R.

Greenwald

A. G.

(1995). Implicit gender stereotyping in judgments of fame. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 181–198.

Bass

(2001). Policing space, policing race: Social control imperatives and police discretionary decisions. Social Justice, 28, 156–176.

Bell

G. C.

Hopson

M. C.

Craig

Robinson

N. W.

(2014). Exploring black and white accounts of 21st-century racial profiling: Riding and driving while black. Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, 15, 33–42.

Bjornstrom

E. S.

Kaufman

R. L.

Peterson

R. D.

Slater

M. D.

(2010). Race and ethnic representations of lawbreakers and victims in crime news: A national study of television coverage. Social Problems, 57, 269–293.

Blair

Judd

Chapleau

(2004). The influence of Afrocentric facial features in criminal sentencing. Psychological Science, 15, 674–679.

Bogle

(2001). Toms, coons, mulattoes, mammies & bucks: An interpretative history of Blacks in American films (4th ed.). New York, NY: Continuum International Publishing Group.

Brunson

(2007). Police don’t like Black people: African American young men’s accumulated police experiences. Criminology & Public Policy, 6, 71–102.

10.

Brunson

Miller

(2006). Young black men and urban policing in the United States. The British Journal of Criminology, 46, 613–640.

11.

Cabrera

A. F.

Nora

Terenzini

P. T.

Pascarella

Hagedorn

L. S.

(1999). Campus racial climate and the adjustment of students to college. Journal of Higher Education, 70, 134–160.

12.

Carlsen

Glenton

(2011). What about N? A methodological study of sample-size reporting in focus group studies. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11, 1–10.

13.

Carter

Bath

(2007). The evolution and components of the Jeanne Clery Act: Implications for higher education. In Fisher

B. S.

Sloan

J. J.

(Eds.), Campus crime: Legal, social and policy perspectives (2nd ed.). Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.

14.

Chiricos

Hogan

Gertz

(1997). Racial composition of neighborhood and fear of crime. Criminology, 35, 107–131.

15.

Chiricos

McEntire

Gertz

(2001). Perceived racial and ethnic composition of neighborhood and perceived risk of crime. Social Problems, 48, 322–340.

16.

Chowdhury

M. F.

(2015). Coding, sorting, and sifting of qualitative data analysis: Debates and discussion. Quality and Quantity, 49, 1135–1143.

17.

Cole

(1999). No equal justice: Race and class in the American criminal justice system. New York, NY: The New Press.

18.

Covington

Taylor

R. B.

(1991). Fear of crime in urban residential neighborhoods: Implications of between- and within-neighborhood sources for current models. The Sociological Quarterly, 32, 231–249.

19.

D’Augelli

A. R.

Hershberger

S. L.

(1993). African American undergraduates on a predominantly white campus: Academic factors, social networks, and campus climate. The Journal of Negro Education, 62, 67–81.

20.

Dixon

T. L.

Linz

(2000). Overrepresentation and underrepresentation of African Americans and Latinos as lawbreakers on television news. Journal of Communication, 50, 131–154.

21.

Drakulich

K. J.

(2009). Estimating risk and expressing fear: Reactions to crime in Seattle neighborhoods. Dissertation defended at the University of Washington, Seattle, WA.

22.

Drakulich

K. J.

(2012). Strangers, neighbors, and race. Race and Justice, 2(4), 322–355.

23.

Eberhardt

Goff

Purdie

Davis

(2004). Seeing black: Race, crime, and visual processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 876–893.

24.

Engel

R. S.

(2005). Citizens’ perceptions of injustice during traffic stops with police. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 42, 445–481.

25.

Fagan

Davies

(2000). Street stops and broken windows: Terry, race and disorder in New York City. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 28, 457.

26.

Fischer

M. J.

(2007). Settling into campus life: Differences by race/ethnicity in college involvement and outcomes. The Journal of Higher Education, 78, 125–161.

27.

Fischer

M. J.

(2010). A longitudinal examination of the role of stereotype threat and racial climate on college outcomes for minorities at elite institutions. Social Psychology of Education, 13, 19–40.

28.

Fisher

B. S.

Hartman

J. L.

Cullen

F. T.

Turner

M. G.

(2002). Making campuses safer for students: The Clery Act as a symbolic legal reform. Stetson Law Review, 32, 61–89.

29.

Fridell

Lim

(2016). Assessing the racial aspects of police force using the implicit- and counter-bias perspectives. Journal of Criminal Justice, 44, 36–48.

30.

Gehring

D. D.

Callaway

R. L.

(1997). Compliance with the notice requirement of the Campus Security Act. College and University, 73, 13–18.

31.

Glaser

(2004). The efficacy and effect of racial profiling: A mathematical modeling approach. Goldman School of Public Policy University of California, Berkeley, 1–37. Retrieved from http://socrates.berkeley.edu/∼glaserj/glaser_profiling_math_model_061504.pdf

32.

Gregory

D. E.

Janosik

S. M.

(2003b). The effect of the Clery Act on campus judicial practices. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 763–778.

33.

Hawkins

D. F.

(1995). Ethnicity, race, and crime: A review of selected studies. In Hawkins

(Ed.), Ethnicity, race, and crime: Perspectives across time and place (pp. 11–45). Albany: State University of New York Press.

34.

Hayle

Wortley

Tanner

(2014). Race, street life, and policing: Implications for racial profiling. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 58, 322–353.

35.

Hernandez

(2013). Latino student’s perceptions of the university campus climate: Exploratory student of first generation students. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Claremont Graduate University at San Diego State University, San Diego, CA.

36.

Hurst

Frank

(2000). How kids view cops: The nature of juvenile attitudes toward the police. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 189–202.

37.

Hurtado

(1992). The campus racial climate: Contexts of conflict. Journal of Higher Education, 63, 539–569.

38.

Inzlicht

Kang

S. K.

(2010). Stereotype threat spillover: How coping with threats to social identity affects aggression, eating, decision making, and attention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 467–481.

39.

Jackson

R. L.

(2006). Scripting the Black masculine body identity, discourse, and racial politics in popular media. Albany: State University of New York Press.

40.

Janosik

S. M.

(2004). Parents’ view on the Clery Act and campus safety. Journal of College Student Development, 45, 43–56.

41.

Janosik

S. M.

Gehring

D. D.

(2003). The impact of the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and the Campus Crime Statistics Act on student decision-making (EPI Policy Paper No. 10). Blacksburg: Virginia Tech.

42.

Janosik

S. M.

Gregory

D. E.

(2003a). The Clery Act and its influence on campus law enforcement practices. NASPA Journal, 41, 182–199.

43.

Janosik

S. M.

Plummer

(2005). The Clery Act, campus safety and the views of assault victim advocates. College Student Affairs Journal, 25, 116–130.

44.

Jones-Brown

(2000). Debunking the myth of officer friendly: How African American males experience community policing. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 16, 209–229.

45.

Kane

(2002). The social ecology of police misconduct. Criminology, 40, 867–896.

46.

Kennedy

(1997). Race, crime and the law. New York: New York Press.

47.

Kerr

S. D.

Jr . (2001). Disclosure of campus security policies and crime statistics among colleges and universities in the upper Midwest. Doctoral Dissertation. University of South Dakota, Vermillion, SD.

48.

Kitzinger

(1995). Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. British Medical Journal, 311, 299–302.

49.

Krueger

R. A.

Casey

M. A.

(2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

50.

Kunda

Oleson

(1995). Maintaining stereotypes in the fact of disconfirmation: Constructing grounds for subtyping deviants. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 565–579.

51.

Lasley

J. R.

(1994). The impact of the Rodney King incident on citizen attitudes toward police. Policing & Society, 3, 245–255.

52.

Lundman

R. J.

Kaufman

R. L.

(2003). Driving while black: Effects of race, ethnicity, and gender on citizen self-reports of traffic stops and police actions. Criminology, 41, 195–220.

53.

Mackie

D. M.

Hamilton

D. L.

Susskind

Rosselli

(1996). Social psychological foundations of stereotype formation. In Macrae

C. N.

Stagnor

Hewstone

(Eds.), Stereotypes and stereotyping (pp. 41–78). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

54.

McGuire

J. C.

(2002). Public institutions in higher education policies on the Crime Awareness and Campus Security Act of 1990 and the Federal Education and Right to Privacy Act (Buckler Amendment). Doctoral Dissertation, Illinois State University, Normal, IL. In Fisher

B. S.

Sloan

J. J.

(Eds.), Campus crime: Legal, social, and policy perspectives (2nd ed.). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

55.

Meehan

Ponder

(2002). Race and place: The ecology of racial profiling African American motorists. Justice Quarterly, 19, 399–430.

56.

Moeller

(1989). Fear of criminal victimization: The effect of neighborhood racial composition. Sociological Inquiry, 59, 208–221.

57.

Morgan

D. L.

(1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

58.

Myers

S. L.

Jr Chung

(1998). Criminal perceptions and violent criminal victimization. Contemporary Economic Policy, XVI, 321–333.

59.

News and views: A current theory on why blacks score lower than whites on the scholastic assessment test. (1999). The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 22, 11.

60.

J.-H.

Kim

(2009). Aging, neighborhood attachment, and fear of crime: Testing reciprocal effects. Journal of Community Psychology, 37, 21–40.

61.

Oliver

(2003). African American men as “criminal and dangerous”: Implications of media portrayals of crime on the criminalization” of African American Men. The Journal of African American Studies, 99, 99–111.

62.

Oun

M. A.

Bach

(2014). Qualitative research method summary. Journal of Multidisciplinary Engineering Science and Technology, 1, 252–258.

63.

Pager

(2003). The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 937–975.

64.

Parkinson

M. R.

(2001). Crime on campus: The effect of the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act on prospective students’ decisions to attend small private liberal arts colleges in rural areas of the Midwest. Master’s thesis, Western Illinois University, Macomb, IL.

65.

Pickett

J. T.

Chiricos

Golden

K. M.

Getz

(2012). Reconsidering the relationship between perceived neighborhood racial composition and Whites’ perceptions of victimization risk: Do racial stereotypes matter? Criminology, 50, 145–186.

66.

Pieterse

A. L.

Carter

R. T.

Evans

S. A.

Walter

R. A.

(2010). An exploratory examination of the associations among racial and ethnic discrimination, racial climate, and trauma-related symptoms in a college student population. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57, 255–263.

67.

Quillian

Pager

(2001). Black neighbors, higher crime? The role of racial stereotypes in evaluations of neighborhood crime. American Journal of Sociology, 107, 717–767.

68.

Quillian

Pager

(2010). Estimating risk: Stereotype amplification and the perceived risk of criminal victimization. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73, 79–104.

69.

Randazzo

M. R.

Borum

Vossekuil

Fein

Modzeleski

Pollack

(2006). Threat assessment in schools: Empirical support and comparison with other approaches. In Jimerson

S. R.

Furlong

M. J.

(Eds.), The handbook of school violence and school safety: From research to practice (pp. 147–156). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

70.

Rankin

S. R.

Reason

R. D.

(2005). Differing perceptions: How students of color and white students perceive campus climate for underrepresented groups. Journal of College Student Development, 46, 43–61.

71.

Reid

L. D.

Radhakrishnan

(2003). Race matters: The relation between race and general campus climate. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 9, 263–275.

72.

Schiellerup

(2008). Stop making sense: The trials and tribulations of qualitative data analysis. Area, 40, 163–171.

73.

Skogan

W. G.

(1995). Crime and the racial fears of white Americans. The ANNALS of the Academy of Political Science, 539, 59–71.

74.

Sloan

J. J.

II Fisher

B. S.

Cullen

F. T.

(1997). Assessing the Student Right-to-Know and Campus Security Act of 1990: An analysis of the victim reporting practices of college and university students. Crime and Delinquency, 43, 146–168.

75.

Smith

W. A.

Allen

W. R.

Danley

(2007). “Assume the Position…You Fit the Description”: Psychological experiences and racial battle fatigue among African American male college students. The American Behavioral Scientist, 51, 551–578.

76.

Snell

(2001). Neighborhood structure, crime, and fear of crime: Testing Bursik and Grasmick’s neighborhood control theory. New York, NY: LFB Scholarly.

77.

Solorzano

Ceja

Yosso

(2000). Critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and campus racial climate: The experiences of African American college students. The Journal of Negro Education, 69, 60–73.

78.

St. John

Heald-Moore

(1996). Racial prejudice and fear of criminal victimization by strangers in public settings. Sociological Inquiry, 66, 267–284.

79.

Staples

(1992). Black men and public space. In Cavitch

(Ed.), Life studies (pp. 2–32). Boston, MA: Bedford Books

80.

Steffensmeier

Ulmer

Kramer

(1998). The interaction of race, gender, and age in criminal sentencing: The punishment cost of being young, black, and male. Criminology, 36, 763–798.

81.

Taylor

R. B.

Covington

(1993). Community structural change and fear of crime. Social Problems, 40, 374–395.

82.

Tversky

Kahneman

(1974) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.

83.

Tyler

T. R.

(2005). Policing in Black and White: Ethnic group differences in trust and confidence in the police. Police Quarterly, 8, 322–342.

84.

White

(2014). The salience of skin tone: Effects on the exercise of police enforcement authority. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 38, 1–18.

85.

Sun

I. Y.

Triplett

R. A.

(2009). Race, class or neighborhood context: Which matters more in measuring satisfaction with police? Justice Quarterly, 26, 125–56.