No abstract

Drug markets are typically portrayed as male dominated, with men occupying the higher positions and women fulfilling the lower positions. Yet, the results of recent work highlight how women's participation and experiences in drug economies varies by the structure and organization of the specific market. We focus on the shake‐and‐bake (“shake”) methamphetamine (meth) market, which seems to have emerged mainly in response to legal attempts to curtail methamphetamine production. We explore how women adapt to structural changes and how they perform gender to navigate a market in which the focus is on personal consumption instead of on monetary gain. By relying on semistructured interviews with 40 women who cooked meth, we identify the gendered strategies they adopt and how these coincide with their position in the drug market. Cooking roles took three forms (partner, lead, and team), and each role was characterized by distinct patterns of gender performance and autonomy (emphasized femininity, matriarchal control, and gender neutral). We show that certain market conditions allow for increased participation among women in meth manufacturing. Yet, even within favorable conditions, variability remains in women's positions and gender performances. The findings highlight the role of organizational and legal context in shaping both the roles women adopt in drug markets and the ways they perform gender.

Scholars generally agree that offending decisions occur in social context, with some suggesting that choice models should explicitly integrate the notion that the deviant actions of others can incentivize offending. In this study, we investigate whether group settings can also disincentivize deviant action via reverse bandwagon effects, where individuals reverse their offending decision and express an intention to opt out of the criminal act. Based on survey data from three universities using hypothetical scenarios about theft and fighting, we find evidence of opt-out thresholds. Our findings indicate that deviant groups can serve as both an incentive and a disincentive, and that the relationship between group size and the perceived utility of crime is more complicated than prior work has suggested. Moreover, we find that these self-reported opt-out thresholds vary across scenarios, indicating that socially interdependent decision-making processes may be situation specific. In the end, the study underscores the importance of acknowledging the social context in offending decisions and highlights that group effects may be more complex and nuanced than previously discussed.

No abstract

No abstract

Religious adherents from most major faith traditions struggle in balancing their individual agency with divine leadership. While this issue of individual versus divine control is complex for those in free society, it becomes even more so when applied to those in correctional and treatment settings. For those attempting to recover from drug addiction, a common conclusion is that drugs have taken control of their lives, thus it is necessary for them to reclaim control. Via a narrative analysis of semi-structured interviews with 30 former drug addicts residing in a faith-based halfway house for women, we explore how the women make sense of losing control of their lives due to their drug use, but then being taught to regain control by surrendering to a higher power. We find strong evidence of Deferring and Collaborative religious coping styles and these coping styles structure how the women discuss the future and their strategies for success.

Gresham Sykes and David Matza argue that, when offenders contemplate committing criminal acts, they use linguistic devices to neutralize the guilt of committing crime. The most common neutralization techniques that offenders use include denial of responsibility, denial of harm, denial of victim, appeal to higher loyalties, and condemnation of the condemners. Despite mixed empirical support, the neutralization theory has gained widespread acceptance within criminology. The theory has been incorporated into many mainstream criminological approaches (e.g., differential association, social control, and reintegrative shaming). Recent theoretical advancements have focused on elaborating upon how neutralization use varies according to the types of offenders who use them and the type of offense committed.

People consider potential risks and rewards while deciding whether to engage in crime. Such perceptions and their impact on behavior can vary according to individual differences like criminal self-efficacy, or one's perception of criminal competency. We examine perceptions of skill, risk, and reward using semi-structured interviews with 46 women "shake and bake" meth cooks currently residing in a halfway house in Alabama. Those who expressed cooking self-efficacy identified many tangible and intangible rewards in meth cooking, which motivated them to persist. They believed the risks were lower and surmountable, employing various risk management strategies. Those who did not express cooking self-efficacy saw cooking as anxiety-inducing, rather than rewarding. They saw the risks as inevitable and made little effort to prevent them but continued cooking to maintain access to meth. Findings indicate that individual levels of criminal self-efficacy should be considered in studies of decision-making and in intervention and treatment strategies.