Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Article 1: Piquero, N. L., Carmichael, S., & Piquero, A. R. (2008). Research note: Assessing the perceived seriousness of white-collar and street crimes. Crime & Delinquency, 54(2), 291-312. doi:10.1177/0011128707303623

Abstract: Controversy surrounds the ranking of crime seriousness of white-collar crimes relative to street crimes, with early research suggesting the general public is indifferent to crimes of the elite, whereas more recent research indicates that the public thinks certain types of white-collar crime are serious. Building on prior research limitations and using data from a national random probability sample, this study compares the seriousness ratings of a number of white-collar and street crimes and examines the factors that distinguish seriousness ratings across the crime types. The analyses indicate that certain types of white-collar crimes are ranked as more serious than street crimes and that a limited set of demographic correlates distinguish seriousness ratings across the two crime types. Future research directions are outlined.

Article 2: Perry, B., & Alvi, S. (2012). “We are all vulnerable”: The in terrorem effects of hate crimes. International Review of Victimology, 18(1), 57-71. doi:10.1177/0269758011422475

Abstract: Ironically, while scholars and policy-makers have long referred to hate crime as a ‘message crime’, the assumption that those beyond the immediate victim are likewise intimidated by the violence has gone untested. Grounded in a recent study of the community impacts of hate crime, we offer some insights into these in terrorem effects of hate crime. We present here some of our qualitative findings. Interestingly, our findings suggest that, in many ways, awareness of violence directed toward another within an identifiable target group yields strikingly similar patterns of emotional and behavioural responses among vicarious victims. They, too, note a complex syndrome of reactions, including shock, anger, fear/vulnerability, inferiority, and a sense of the normativity of violence. And, like the proximal victim, the distal victims often engage in subsequent behavioural shifts, such as changing patterns of social interaction. On a positive note, there is also some evidence that these reactions can culminate not in withdrawal, but in the potential for community mobilization.