Taking the long view: A temporal assessment of minority threat theory in 21st century sentencing

Purpose: Researchers have offered several reasons for the mixed minority threat-sentencing literature including diverse dependent variables, heterogenous threat conceptualizations, and incongruent threat measurements. An overlooked potential explanation, however, is the heavy reliance on cross-sectional snapshots. If minority threat effects vary over time, then past works showing differing results may not "contradict," but rather reflect substantive temporal shifts in minority threat effects. Against this backdrop, the current study "zooms out" and considers the evidence for minority threat theory in sentencing throughout the 21st century. Methods: Using data spanning nearly 20 years, we examine the effects of minority population size (static threat) and change (dynamic threat) on federal sentence length outcomes at multiple time points - both overall and specifically for minority defendants. In doing so, we produce 40 tests of minority threat theory ranging from 2000 to 2018. Results: Findings indicate that support for minority threat theory in sentencing is meager, but conclusions about the theory's predictive validity often depend on the time point, racial/ethnic group, and threat measurement examined. Conclusions: Results suggest that inquiries into whether support for minority threat exists may be too simplistic. Instead, researchers may be better off asking "when does support for minority threat theory exist?"