Journal of Criminal Justice 42 (2014) 221232

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Criminal Justice

Notes on a (sex crime) scandal: The impact of media coverage of sexual

abuse in the Catholic Church on public opinion
Christina Mancini a,, Ryan T. Shields b
a
b

Virginia Commonwealth University, L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs, 923 West Franklin Street, Richmond, VA 23284-2028, United States
Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Mental Health, 624 N. Broadway, HH810, Baltimore, Maryland, 21205, United States

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Available online 6 July 2013

a b s t r a c t
Purpose: Public opinion scholarship has identied the media as a driving force behind decidedly negative
public sentiment about crime and justice. We draw on this media cultivation framework to examine whether
the highly publicized sexual abuse scandal within the Catholic Church impacted public opinion.
Methods: Using data from a 2010 CBS/New York Times national poll we investigate how exposure to news
coverage detailing the abuse affected levels of public condence in the Churchs ability to protect children.
Results: Contrasting with prior research, we uncovered a positive impact of media exposure. Catholics
with greater media consumption about the scandal were signicantly more condent in the Churchs ability
to prevent sexual abuse. In addition, indicating a boomerang effect of coverage, Catholics who felt the
media coverage unfairly targeted the Church held more optimistic views. Supporting the substitution thesis,
religiosity mediated these effects among this group. This positive impact was not just limited to Catholics,
however. Non-Catholics who perceived the media coverage to be biased felt more positively about the
Churchs ability to address sex crime in the future.
Conclusion: Media consumption of the sexual abuse scandal does not exert a negative inuence on public
condence in the Church.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction
Over the past two decades, signicant public concern has been
directed at addressing sexual victimization, particularly for those
offenses involving children (Payne, Tewksbury, & Mustaine, 2010;
Plante & McChesney, 2011). Illustrative of this attention has been the
prominent media focus on sexual abuse within the Catholic Church
(Finkelhor, 2003; Jenkins, 1995; Terry, 2008). The long-running scandal
involved widespread claims of child sexual abuse perpetrated by clergy,
and also, the alleged cover-up of these crimes by high-level administrators. Precise estimates of the extent of sexual victimization within the
Church are difcult to nd. One of the only national studies to investigate the prevalence of abuse (by asking Church ofcials to provide information about allegations) estimated that 10,667 allegations of sex
crime were made against clergy members from 1950 to 2002 (John
Jay College Research Team, 2006). This number reects the fact that
many priests had multiple crimes alleged against them, as the total
number of priests with allegations was 4,392 out of a population of
109,694 priests who served in the ministry at some point during that
time (Terry, Smith, Schuth, Kelly, Vollman, & Massey, 2011).
The gravity of media reportage of the abuse scandal in the U.S. cannot be overly emphasized, as after Cheit, Shavit, and Reiss-Davis
Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 804 828 2292; fax: +1 804 827 1275.
E-mail address: cmancin5@fau.edu (C. Mancini).
0047-2352/$ see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2013.06.006

observation (2010) observation suggestsPress coverage of the

Catholic Church cover-up took on a scope and intensity that was unparalleled in the reporting of other [child sexual abuse] CSA trends
(p. 113). Per the media cultivation hypothesis, this pronounced coverage would be expected to shape distinctly negative views about the
Church. As scholars of media effects explain, signicant exposure to
media reports distorts audience beliefs about the world and inuences cognitive and behavioral states . . . the greater ones exposure
to the media, the more likely it is that ones perceptions will match
what is most frequently depicted in the media (Weitzer & Kubrin,
2004, p. 499). The end result? Piquero, Piquero, Terry, Youstin, and
Nobles (2008, p. 585) theorized that the highly publicized scandal
reinforced many stereotypes about sexual offenders, making it difcult for professionals to reestablish public awareness of the full spectrum of offenders . . . public perceptions of sex offenders leaned
toward the view of untreatable offenders who offend throughout
their lifetimes . . . [although] this viewpoint is contrary to extant research suggesting that . . . sex offenders are not necessarily the recidivistic, specialized, dangerous offenders that some believe.
However, there is another possible explanation, so far unexplored
in the criminological literature. Rather than characterizing the media
as an entity that generates public scorn and condemnation when negative events occur, it may be that the public discounts news stories,
even those reporting on disturbing instances of child sexual abuse.
For instance, they may feel the media are unfair and unbalanced

222

C. Mancini, R.T. Shields / Journal of Criminal Justice 42 (2014) 221232

in their reporting and may not trust news accounts, resulting in a

boomerang effect of coveragewhereby audience members assume
a defensive stance to the portrayal of the coverage, and adopt views
opposite to the content of media messages (Bushman & Stack, 1996;
Hornik, Jacobsohn, Orwin, Piesse, & Kalton, 2008). More generally, it
may be that the media shape potentially positive views. Perhaps the
presumption that the media operate under the if it bleeds, it leads
principle might be incorrect, overstated, or contingent on the type
of incident. In the context of the Catholic Church scandal, perhaps exposure to news coverage provided Americans with access to the
Churchs ofcial stance toward identifying and prosecuting abusers.
Under this logic, potentially optimistic views about the Church
might be transmitted via news reports.
Moreover, other aspects of media effects might also be nuanced.
For example, media exposure, even to particularly disturbing incidents, like child sexual abuse allegations, might not impact all people
in the same manner. Prior research has established these conditional
effects, whereby media exposure is variably interpreted (Gunter,
1987; Weitzer & Kubrin, 2004). Thus, under this perspective, exposure might not be uniformly experienced across diverse populations.
For instance, in the context of a scandal involving the Catholic Church,
it is likely that Catholics might be more willing to discount the news
stories, as they directly interact with the Church and may not rely
exclusively on media coverage to learn about aspects of the scandal.
On the other hand, parishioners who learn about an alleged cover-up
scandal involving vulnerable child victims may question the Church
and its administration.
Not least, public opinion about priest-abusers, or more generally
sexual abuse occurring within an organization, might differ markedly
from public views about general sexual offending. For example,
priest-abusers constitute a distinct sub-type of sex offenders. They
are generally believed to be older and more highly educated than
other offenders (Langevin, Curnoe, & Bain, 2000; Sullivan & Beech,
2004). In contrast to sex crime victimization trends in the general
population, victims of clergy offenders are overwhelmingly male
(Terry et al., 2011). Accordingly, the public may hold different views
about clergy-perpetrated sexual abuse compared to sexual abuse
committed by non-clergy sex offenders. Moreover, it may be that
the public attributes different factors to clergy sexual abuse than to
general sexual offending. In turn, their perceptions about and condence in the Catholic Church may be differentially affected.
Yet, noticeably missing from the criminological literature has been
a systematic examination of public opinion about the Catholic Church
sexual abuse scandal or how views of priests as sex offenders differ
from perceptions of non-clergy offenders. Further, there is virtually
no empirical investigation of the impact of media exposure about
the scandal on public perceptions. This is a potentially limiting research gap; as the Church struggles to relay its messageand more
broadly, social institutions wrestle with how to respond to, investigate, and prevent sexual abuseunderstanding how people react to
these scandals (and crime, more generally) is important.
Put differently, such research may help explain how other crimerelated scandals and negative events impact public views, especially
those involving sex abuse within social institutions. For instance, in
2011, a string of media accounts emerged reporting that Pennsylvania
State University administrators neglected to forward allegations of
sexual abuse by a former football coach to law enforcement. Shortly
thereafter, numerous other sexual abuse allegations were made
against other sports organizations (see Dorfman, Mejia, Gonzalez, &
Cheyne, 2012 for a review of these reports). As recently as 2012 at
least four other institutions were marred by sexual abuse allegations:
the Boy Scouts of America (Johnson, 2012), the British Broadcasting
Corporation (Burns, 2012), Spirit Lake Sioux tribe (Williams, 2012),
and the Hasidic Jewish community in Brooklyn, New York (Otterman
& Rivera, 2012). With the emphasis on child sexual abuse and alleged
concealment, many commentators have compared these scandals to

the Catholic Church abuse allegations (Cover-ups, 2012; Mahler,

2011; Williams, 2012). Given these recent incidents, examination of
public opinion about the Catholic Church abuse scandal has implications for understanding the impact of these other highly publicized
incidents involving sexual abuse victimization within organizations.
The goal of the current study is to advance scholarship by examining
how media coverage of the sexual abuse scandal affected public perceptions about the Catholic Churchparticularly its ability to respond to
future allegations of sex crime. In so doing, it aims to contribute to two
literaturesa larger body of criminological research centered on understanding societal reactions to sexual victimization, and studies centered
on media consumption and public views about crime and justice.
Sexual abuse in the Catholic Church
Empirical research examining sexual abuse in the Catholic Church
constitutes a relatively small body of literature. Having said that, some
scholarship has investigated the prevalence and extent of sexual
abuse allegations and the characteristics of clergy-offenders and
their offenses. To provide context for the studys analysis, this research
is summarized below.
Prevalence
Findings from one of the only national studies examining the extent of abuse indicate that while allegations of abuse were reported
throughout U.S. churches, relatively few priests were implicated in
abuse allegations. At the same time, trends in sexual abuse claims
were not uniform. In particular, the study, commissioned by the
Catholic Church surveyed 195 dioceses and eparchies in the U.S.
Survey results indicate that offending was widespread; all but seven
of the 195 dioceses and eparchies that participated in the study have
reported that allegations of sexual abuse of youths under the age of
18 were made against at least one priest serving in the ecclesiastical
ministry in that diocese or eparchy. Overall, close to 11,000 allegations
were made against priests and deacons from 1950 to 2002 (John Jay
College Research Team, 2006). Many of these clergy members had
multiple allegations made against them.
Put differently, in placing this offending estimate in context, 4%
of priests were alleged to have committed sex crimes over a 50 year
period.1 Notably, earlier studies examining sexual abuse allegations
in the Church have reported relatively similar prevalence estimates
using smaller samples of clergy (see e.g., Jenkins, 1996; Sipe, 1995).
Given the heterogeneity in sexual offending, contrasting prevalence
estimates for any given offender sub-type can potentially amount
to an apples-to-oranges comparison. That point notwithstanding,
on the one hand priest-abuser prevalence rates are believed to be in
line with trends of sexual offending in other religious organizations
(Plante & Daniels, 2004). On the other hand, some studies examining
sex offenders in the general population have found that only 1% of
males will sexually offend over the life course (Marshall, 1997).
Thus, this estimate is substantially lower than the prevalence rate
reported for priests. In short, because priest-abusers constitute a
distinct sub-set of sex offenders it is difcult to precisely assess the
extent to which their prevalence rates of offending compare with
non-priest offenders.
Evidence also exists to suggest that the distribution of alleged
abuse events reported in the Church over time was not uniform.
That is, national estimates indicate nearly three-quarters of sexual
abuse incidents were alleged to have occurred between 1960 and
1984 (John Jay College Research Team, 2006). Alternatively, this indicates that substantially fewer allegations were made in recent decades
(1985 to 2002). This downward trend in allegations, per the John Jay
College Research Team (2006), should take several factors into account.
For instance, the declining percentage of priests ordained each year and,
more largely, societal changes in how sexual victimization is reported

C. Mancini, R.T. Shields / Journal of Criminal Justice 42 (2014) 221232

and addressed are factors that have coincided with the decline in
allegations.
Characteristics of priest-abusers and their offenses
Beyond estimating the prevalence of child sexual abuse within the
Catholic Church, studies have also examined characteristics of the
abusers and their offenses. The accuracy of media reports concerning
some of these details has been called into question. For example,
numerous stories incorrectly portrayed most of the accused clergy
as relatively older, pedophile priests targeting prepubescent children (McGlone, 2003). Notably, the Terry et al. (2011, p. 10) study
observed that only 22% of sex crime victims were this age or younger
(see also Langevin et al., 2000). McGlone (2003) came to a similar conclusion in his review of sexual abuse allegations within the Church. He
contended that close to 80% of accused clergy could be classied as
having ephebophilia, or a sexual attraction to older teenagers (14 to
18 year olds). This work is notable for highlighting that the majority
of abuse victims targeted by clergy were signicantly olderpubescent
or post-pubescent youths.
In addition to a focus on victim age, this scholarship has investigated the gender of Church abuse victims. For context, in the general
population, it has been found that women and girls, compared to men
and boys, have greater risk of being sexually victimized during their
lifetimes (Administration for Children and Families, 1996, 2010; see
Bolen & Scannapieco, 1999 for a review; Finkelhor, Hotaling, Lewis,
& Smith, 1990). In contrast, ndings from studies examining abuse
within the Catholic Church suggest a distinctly different pattern
namely, the majority (81%) of victims from 1950-2002 were male
(Terry et al., 2011).
In the John Jay College Research Team (2006) study (which relied
on ofcial records of abuse allegations), the age range of priestabusers was wide (mid-twenties to ninety at the time they rst
abused). However, the largest group40%rst offended when they
were between the ages of thirty and thirty-nine. Langevin et al.
(2000) directly compared clergy offenders with non-clergy sex offenders (using ofcial police data and self-reports). Their results
(the study did not examine age of onset of offending) also demonstrate a signicant age effect, with clerics, on average, being substantially older than non-clergy offenders (see also, Sullivan & Beech,
2004). Collectively, these results indicate a relatively older population
of offenders, compared to general non-sex offenders, and non-clergy
sex offenders. This nding should be interpreted with caution, however. Given that not only are [priests] likely to be older when they
enter their occupation, they also occupy positions of authority and
power and encounter specic sorts of opportunities to engage in specic sorts of offenses, these estimates may be biased (Piquero et al.,
2008, p. 596). Put differently, for priest-abusers, certain features of
their occupation may impose signicantly greater opportunities
for them to successfully offend or to avoid ofcial detection for
longer intervals of timeresulting in an articially higher age of
onset of offending. Indeed, recent research conducted by Lussier and
Mathesius (2012) indicates that on average sex offenders delay ofcial
detection by nearly seven years. Although the study did not specically
examine cleric offenders, it provides some evidence that priest-abusers
would be among the most successful sex offenders in avoiding ofcial
contact with the criminal justice system. For instance, in the Lussier and
Mathesius (2012) study, offenders who were well-known to their victims and who were in a position of trust and authority had the longest
delays in ofcial detection.
Research has also studied the types of offenses committed by
priest-abusers. In the John Jay College Research Team (2006) study,
these crimes included verbal abuse (e.g., sex talk) and/or pornography offenses (being shown pornographic magazines or movies) and
more severe offenses (e.g., forced intercourse, oral sex, fondling). Per
the study, the most common reported offenses involved touching

223

under the victims clothes (combined percent for male and female
victims = 42%). Notably, however, as the authors explained, these
categories were not mutually exclusive as 70% of the allegations
involved multiple acts of abuse. This general ndingthat fondling
tended to be the most typical offensewas replicated in a separate
study examining cleric offenders in Canada (n = 33; Firestone,
Moulden, & Wexler, 2009).
One other investigation using national data collected by the John
Jay College Research Team (2006) suggests that priest-abusers with
multiple victims differed signicantly from offenders with only one
victim. For example, Perillo, Mercado, and Terry (2008) found that
multiple victim offenders were more likely to have abused victims
much younger or older than typical victims in the Church, were at a
younger cleric age at onset of offending, had all male victims, had a
substance abuse problem, had been sexually victimized, and used
threats toward victims (see also, Mercado, Tallon, & Terry, 2008).
A separate study also relying on the John Jay College Research
Team (2006) data uncovered a chronic offender effect. Using ofcial
police investigation data, Piquero and his colleagues (2008) demonstrated that chronic offenders (i.e., offenders who committed multiple
sex offenses) represented only 2% of the full sample of clerics, but
were responsible for over one-third of all police investigations. Notably,
these ndings are on par with what has been discovered in a larger
criminal career literaturenamely that a relatively small group of offenders tend to commit a disproportionately high share of crime.
Some studies have directly compared clergy sex offenders to other
types of sex offenders using control groups. For example, in a study examining clergy sex offenders (n = 24), matched controls (i.e., matched
on characteristics such as offense category; n = 24), and non-clergy
sex offenders (n = 2,125), Langevin and his colleagues (2000)
reported important differences. Clergy sex offenders were signicantly
more likely to be older and more highly educated compared to controls
and general sex offenders (see also, Sullivan & Beech, 2004). Lending
support to Lussier and Mathesius (2012) ndings, they also appeared
to be more successful at evading criminal detection. That is, clergy
sex offenders were signicantly less likely to come to the attention of
law enforcement than controls. In addition, the Langevin et al. (2000)
study demonstrated that clergy sex offenders were more likely to use
physical force during the commission of their crimes (such as punching,
slapping, and hitting their victims) compared to non-clergy offenders.
Given the methodological variation across studies, it is difcult to
place these general ndings into context. For example, some studies
include a range of cleric sex offendersRoman Catholic, Anglican,
and Protestant offenders (Langevin et al., 2000). Accordingly, such
samples might obscure potentially important differences between
these types of clergy-offenders. Others have not included control
groups in their studies (see e.g., Firestone et al., 2009; John Jay
College Research Team, 2006); thus, making it difcult to accurately
determine how in fact priest-abusers differ from non-priest/clergy offenders. Despite these discrepancies, several points bear emphasis.
First, a relatively small number of priest-abusersroughly 4%were
implicated in sexual abuse allegations. Of course, caution is warranted
in generalizing from this estimate. It likely represents a signicant
proportion of underreported offenses and is not necessarily comparable to estimates of general sexual offending. Second, as national data
indicate, fewer reports of sexual abuse were reported in more recent
decades than in earlier years. Third, unlike the characterization conveyed in the mediathat most priest-abusers were pedophileslittle
empirical evidence appears to substantiate that claim. While certainly
there were accounts of priests abusing young prepubescent children,
the typical age range of victims was much higher than what was
conveyed by media reports (McGlone, 2003). Fourth, unlike general
sexual offender trends, clergy offenders overwhelmingly target male
victims (e.g., Firestone et al., 2009). Fifth, although ofcial data tend
to support the notion that clergy offenders constitute an older population, they are also theorized to be more successful at delaying

224

C. Mancini, R.T. Shields / Journal of Criminal Justice 42 (2014) 221232

detection. Thus, determining the typical age of onset of offending for

priest-abusers is signicantly more challenging. Sixth, most accounts
indicate that fondling offenses were the most typical offenses committed against victims. Seventh, priest-abusers who had multiple victims shared distinct characteristics from those abusers with only one
victim. Eighth, similar to what has been uncovered in criminal career
studies, a relatively small sub-set of priests commit a disproportionate share of sexual abuse offenses. Ninth, and nally, some evidence
indicates that clergy-abusers differ from non-clergy offenders in
their superior ability to evade law enforcement detection and in
their greater reliance of force against victims (Langevin et al., 2000).
What can be taken away from these ndings? More generally,
they are consistent with a prominent theme of the sex crime literature indicating that wide heterogeneity exists within sexual offending
categories (e.g., voyeurism, lewd and lascivious behavior, sexual
battery; see e.g., Robertiello & Terry, 2007). This scholarship is illuminating for showing how clergy-abusers represent a distinct class of
sex offenders. Thus, it may be that the public perceives this group of
sex offenders differently from non-clergy offenders. At the same
time, by denition, clergy-offenders have used their ofcial position
to offend. Thus, the public may also attribute blame to the Church
for not sufciently responding to sexual abuse allegations. Under
that backdrop, we next review research examining the media depiction of this scandal. In the following section, we outline theoretical
perspectives to understand how media coverage of the sexual abuse
scandal might impact public evaluation of the Church.
Media coverage of the scandal
Several accounts speak to the national prominence of the Catholic
Church sexual abuse scandal. The New York Times extended front page
coverage to the story for 41 consecutive days in 2002 (as reported
in Plante & McChesney, 2011). This attention was not unique to the
Times. For example, in 2004, the Boston Globe created an online resource center which provides detailed information about on-going
sexual abuse allegations (Boston Globe Spotlight Investigation,
2004). In line with these accounts, members of the public also
appeared xated on the story. In 2002, readers of the Associated
Press ranked the Catholic Church sex abuse scandal as the third most
important story of the year (overshadowed only by the number 1
and 2 storiesthe Showdown with Iraq and D.C. Sniper Shootings,
respectively; see Dokecki, 2004).
Recent accounts lend credence to the notion that it constituted
big news across the country throughout the 2000s. For example,
one study identied 172 relevant articles about the scandal published
in four popular news magazines (U.S. News and World Report,
Time, People, and Newsweek) from 1992 until 2004 (Cheit et al.,
2010). Findings from a recent content analysis conducted by the
Pew Research Center (2010) illustrate the continued salience of the
scandal. These results indicate that the Catholic priest abuse scandal
ranked 8th as Top Stories in the U.S. in Spring 2010 (outranked
mostly by political issues such as healthcare, 2010 elections,
Obama administration, and etc.). The same study identied nearly
13,000 news stories published in major national and world newspapers (e.g., New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today) that in some
way discussed the clergy abuse scandal between January 2002
and April 2010 (see Fig. 1). Additionally, the Pew Research Center
(2010) study conducted a longitudinal analysis of newspaper coverage of the scandal. As inspection of Fig. 1 indicates, while the greatest
media coverage of the scandal occurred in 2002 (driven largely by the
high prole case of Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston who along with
other bishops across the United States was accused of concealing allegations of sexual abuse), consistent coverage continued throughout the
mid-2000s. Notably, an increase in coverage is evident toward the latter
end of the decade. This nding is notable to highlight because it indicatesthe peak year notwithstandingthat the scandal was featured

prominently in the media throughout the 2000s. Additionally, it appears that news reports have begun to focus more heavily on the scandal toward the end of the decade.
A natural extension of this scholarship would involve examining
whether and how these media depictions impacted public opinion
about the Church, particularly, its ability to respond to allegations
of sexual abuse in the future. Notably, virtually no criminological
research has examined this critical area. There is a larger media consumption literature, however, which provides some insight for theorizing how media effects might affect public perceptions. A separate
strand of this scholarship has also identied audience effects, or
variation in how media messages might be perceived among different
populations. We draw on this research below.
Theorizing about media consumption and audience effects
Media cultivation and boomerang frameworks
Prior criminological scholarship focused on media consumption
indicates that the media shape pessimistic views about crime and
the criminal justice system. These pronounced negative effects
can be explained under the media cultivation framework. That is,
as Gerbner et al. (1980, p. 14) explained, The massive ow of
[media] stories showing what things are, how things work, and
what to do about them has become the socializer of our time. These
stories form a coherent, if not mythical world in every home. Implied
in this observation is that the content from media messages not only
serve to provide information about current events, but also as a conduit which directs opinions about how to react to them. As a result,
information transmitted about particularly negative occurrences via
media messages should perpetuate negative views among the public.
Findings from some studies support the media cultivation perspective. For example, research focused on investigating fear of crime has
linked media consumption to higher levels of fear of crime (Chiricos,
Padgett, & Gertz, 2000; Dowler, 2003); although social and demographic attributes appear to mediate this relationship (Chiricos,
Eschholz, & Gertz, 1997; for a review see Heath & Gilbert, 1996).
Other work in this area has explored how media messages shape
negative views about certain populations, such as African Americans.
For example, Hurwitz and Pefey (1997) identify the mass media
as contributing to the formation of crime-related racial stereotypes.
Beyond research examining media effects on crime-views, a smaller
body of literature has examined how media consumption negatively
impacts views about the criminal justice system (Fox, Van Sickel, &
Steiger, 2007), and specic justice agencies, such as law enforcement
(Weitzer & Tuch, 2004). For instance, Fox et al. (2007) measured
the relationship between public views about criminal justice system
performance and knowledge of high prole cases heavily reported
in the media (e.g., the O. J. Simpson criminal trial, the Senate impeachment trial of Bill Clinton). An indirect media exposure nding
emerged per Fox et al. (2007), negative reactions to each of the
cases [were] correlated with lower levels of condence in the criminal justice system as a whole (p. 150). In a different study also focused on assessing public condence in the justice system, Weitzer
and Tuch (2004) examined factors that predicted satisfaction with
law enforcement. A signicant correlate of reduced satisfaction was
exposure to media accounts about police misconduct. This cultivation
effect, however, was only evident among minorities; indicating support for audience effectswhereby media messages are differentially
experienced based on membership into certain social and demographic groups. In reviewing the nature of these media accounts,
the authors explained that many of them emphasized police misconduct involving minority victims.
Despite these ndings supporting media cultivation, research from a
larger media consumption scholarship have uncovered boomerang
effectswhereby negative messages might perpetuate positive views

C. Mancini, R.T. Shields / Journal of Criminal Justice 42 (2014) 221232

225

Fig. 1. Extent of Media Coverage of the Catholic Church Sex Abuse Scandal, 2002-2010. *Note: For 2010, only newspaper reports for January through April were included. The gure
was created using data collected by the Pew Research Center (2010) in their longitudinal analysis of media reports detailing the Catholic Church abuse scandal. Using the
Lexis-Nexis database, major world newspapers published in English were searched. Specically, terms such as clergy sexual abuse, Catholic Church, sexual abuse, priests,
and other relevant phrases were used to identify articles published from 2002 to 2010 (n = 12,431).

among the public (Bushman & Stack, 1996; Hornik et al., 2008). Rarely
has this theoretical framework been applied to studies of crime and justice, and in particular to examining how media coverage of a sexual
abuse scandal impacts views about an organization. We can, however,
draw on ndings from this boomerang literature to understand this
competing theoretical perspective.
To illustrate, Bolton, Cohen, and Bloom (2006) conducted a series of
experiments and found that respondents were more likely to report intention to engage in risky scenarios (e.g. smoking, credit card use, and
online shopping-related identify theft) after being exposed to negative
media messages about these topics. A similar trend appears when the
focus is on examining the impact of anti-drug/alcohol campaigns. For
example, the absence of empirical support for the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.) program and other interventions in reducing
teen alcohol and drug use is well-documented (Ennett, Rosenbaum,
Flewelling, Bieler, Ringwalt, & Bailey, 1994; West & ONeal, 2004). In
particular, Erceg-Hurn (2008) examined the empirical evidence for
the Montana Meth Project (an anti-methamphetamine prevention
campaign that used media to portray images of methamphetamine
users) and reported that perceptions of dangerousness of meth decreased while views that using meth was acceptable increased. Quick
and Bates (2010) explored audience responses as an important mediator between message consumption and behavioral response. Using a
sample of college students, Quick and Bates (2010) found that students
who viewed anti-alcohol consumption messages to be a threat to their
personal freedom and perceived right to drink were more likely to express anger toward the ads. These negative reactions were then associated with greater intentions to drink excessively and to associate with
others who frequently drink.
These ndings suggest that media effects are perhaps more nuanced than previously conceptualized in the criminological literature,
resulting in perceptions and behaviors that may run counter to the
message design. This prior research provides a springboard for anticipating how media coverage of sex crimes within the Catholic Church
may shape perceptions about the Churchs ability to sufciently respond to sexual abuse in the future. These messages, however, might
be variably interpreted among different groups. Below, we summarize
audience effects research that is relevant to the current study.
Audience effects
Media cultivation and boomerang effect frameworks are useful for
understanding how media exposure impacts reactions to certain organizations, such as the Catholic Church. It should be noted however
that media effectswhether cultivation or boomerangappear to be

differentially experienced across groups. For instance, Weitzer and

Tuchs (2004) nding that race amplied the negative impact of
media exposure on satisfaction with law enforcement indicates that
certain social and demographic characteristics moderate the effect
of media consumption. In the context of a sex crime scandal involving
the Catholic Church, religious afliation, particularly Catholicism,
stands out as a potentially important moderator of the medias impact
on views about the Church. Religious afliation, as it pertains to audience effects and views about sex crime, has rarely been explored in
criminological research.
In the case of a scandal occurring within the Catholic Church, it
would be expected that Catholic public opinion would substantially
differ from that of non-Catholic public opinion. There are two ways
Catholics might react. First, they might generally have more positive
assessmentstending to have greater condence that the Church
can effectively respond to and address sexual abuse allegations. That
is, perhaps Catholics rely more on their experiential knowledge to
form an opinion of the Church. By dint of their religious afliation,
they are in a position to learn about the aspects of the allegations
and the Churchs ofcial response from other parishioners, or the
local clergy. It follows under this logic that Catholics might be more
willing to discount the publicity; and so their views would generally
be more positive.
On the contrary side, given the nature of the scandalsexual victimization of a particularly vulnerable populationCatholics might
feel shame and disbelief and question their religious institution.
Indeed, some prior work suggests tentative support for the idea that
the scandal has negatively impacted parishioners views of the Church.
One early study of Canadian and American Catholics that used a mailed
survey method found that Catholics who were victimized by a member
of the clergy in the past were signicantly more negative in their assessments of the Church compared to non-victims (Rossetti, 1995). While
the study did not focus directly on media consumption effects, it is noteworthy for highlighting the spiritual damage caused by child sexual
abuse (p. 1469). Other research provides indirect support for the idea
that the scandal may be linked with reduced parishioner condence.
For example, Dills and Hernndez-Julin (2012) recently examined
Catholic School enrollment data and the emergence of negative publicity surrounding the Church. They found that Catholic school enrollments
substantially declined nationally during the period in which reports of
the abuse scandal emerged. Indeed, the negative press, per the authors,
may have resulted in a decrease in demand as parents were discouraged from church attendance and from enrolling their children or a
diminished supply because of the settlement costs and the dioceses reduced ability to raise funds from its members, or both (p. 151).

226

C. Mancini, R.T. Shields / Journal of Criminal Justice 42 (2014) 221232

There is also the potential for religiosity among Catholics to mediate the effect of media consumption on public opinion. That is, under
the substitution thesis (Gunter, 1987; Surette, 2007), those who identify as Catholic but are signicantly less active in the Church (e.g., indicated by lower mass attendance, fewer monetary donations) and
less religious will likely depend more heavily on media reports to
learn about the scandal than their more active Catholic counterparts.
On the contrary, highly religious and active Catholics likely have
greater direct experience with the Church (e.g., through more frequent mass attendance and Church participation). As a result, this
group might not need to rely directly on media reports to form
views about the Church. Thus, for the former, less religious group of
Catholics, media coverage potentially acts as a surrogate (see e.g.,
Weitzer & Kubrin, 2004, p. 500) for rst-hand experiential knowledge
of the scandal.
Despite these theoretical arguments, virtually no scholarship
has systematically investigated how media coverage of the Catholic
Churchs sexual abuse scandal affected perceptions about the
Churchparticularly its ability to respond to abuse allegations in the
future. The current study addresses this research gap. Specically,
we draw on national survey data to test how media consumption of
the event impacted the general publics and Catholics condence in
the Church. The theoretical hypotheses that inform our analysis are
outlined below.
The current study
Research questions
The study focuses on four research questions. First, how does media
consumption affect perceptions of the Church? Second, do perceptions
of the coverage (as biased or as fair and balanced) impact public condence? Third, do these media effects hold for both non-Catholics and
Catholics? Fourth and nally, does religiosity among Catholics moderate the effect of media exposure on condence in the Church?
Hypotheses
Given the competing theoretical frameworks about media effects
on public views, the current study tests four hypotheses directly
related to media consumption:
H1. Applying the media cultivation hypothesis, those who reported
greater exposure to coverage should hold signicantly more negative
views about the Churchs ability to address sex crime in the future.

Church/Illegal Immigration public opinion telephone poll housed in

the Roper Public Opinion Network (CBS News/New York Times Poll:
Catholic Church/Illegal Immigration, USCBSNYT2010-04B). The survey
was conducted in 2010 (April 28-May 2)2 and sampled both landline
and cell phone users. It asked respondents (n = 1,045) about their
views concerning several controversial political, religious, and crimerelated topics, including views about sexual abuse allegations within
the Catholic Church, and prior media consumption of the scandal.3
Using the American Association for Public Opinion Research
(AAPOR, 2004) RR-I formula, the response rate for the survey was estimated to be 9% which, per the Principal Investigator of the study,
Sarah Dutton, (personal communication) is typical of the rates for
a standard three-day poll, and to the rates of the major media polls.
Notably, this estimate accords with the average response rate for
Pew Research Center polls (also, 9%; Pew Research Center, 2012). Although a higher response rate is ideal, the general decline in response
rates is evident across nearly all types of surveys, in the United States
and internationally (AAPOR, 2012). Sample characteristics suggest
that the poll is representative of national demographics. Specically,
51% of respondents were female, three-quarters of respondents were
White, and 39% considered themselves political conservatives which
match national estimates of race (Humes, Jones, & Ramirez, 2011),
sex (Howden & Meyer, 2011), and political afliation (Saad, 2012).
However, the sample over-represents young and middle-aged adults.
In the poll, half of the respondents were between the ages of 18 and 44
compared to the national estimate of 36.5% (Howden & Meyer, 2011).4
Because of the focus on the Catholic Church, the poll included an
oversample of Catholics.
Given the goals of the current study, we focus on questions related
to Americans perceptions about sex crime within the Catholic Church
and their media exposure to the scandal. Because views might arguably
differ among Non-Catholics and Catholics, we rst test media effects on
public condence using a Non-Catholic sub-sample (n = 731) and,
then, a Catholic sub-sample (n = 204). The justication for examining
separate samples is as follows. First, one of the only national studies to
assess how the sex abuse scandal impacted public views examined
only Catholics (Gray & Perl, 2006) and included only descriptive statistics, thus precluding the possibility of systematically comparing and
contrasting how the scandal, and more precisely, media coverage of
the scandal, impacted non-Catholic Americans views. Second, and related to the variable interpretation theory, Catholics might share traits
which moderate the impact of media exposure on their views of the
Church. Examining two separate samples ensures that analyses are
able to detect differences among these groups.
Dependent variable

H2. Extending media consumption effects, respondents who felt the

coverage of the scandal was biased against the Catholic Church will
not express more negative views of the Church.
H3. In line with the variable interpretation hypothesis, media effects
will be differentially experienced by Catholics and non-Catholics. Put
differently, under this perspective media effects should not be as pronounced for Catholics.
H4. Within the Catholic sub-sample, religiosity (e.g., the extent of donations parishioners have made to the Church, those who identify as
a strong Catholic) should mediate or reduce the impact of coverage
and perceptions of fairness on condence. That is, per the substitution
thesis, media consumption among the very devout and involved
Catholics will matter less in their assessments of the Church.
Data and sample
The current study draws on responses from a national CBS News/
New York Times Poll of American adults (aged 18 and older): Catholic

Condence in Catholic Church

The outcome variable we explore is public condence in the
Church to sufciently respond to sex crime allegations in the future.
The theoretical focus here is two-fold. First, by relying on this measure,
we are able to provide a partial test of the media cultivation hypothesis.
That is, under this perspective, reports involving a sexual abuse
scandal within a religious organization should shape decidedly negative
views about the Church. Second, by examining the impact of a sex
crime-related scandal on the publics assessment of the Church to prevent these offenses in the future, analyses contribute to current efforts
to systematically understand public perceptions about sex offending.
The exact measure used in the survey was: How much condence do
you have in the Vatican to make the changes needed to prevent sexual
abuse of children by priests in the futurea lot, some, not much or none
at all? This variable was reverse-coded so that higher responses indicate greater condence, 1 = none, 2 = not much, 3 = some,
and 4 = a lot. The dependent variable was recoded as a dichotomous
variable (0 = not much/none 1 = some/a lot) for practical and substantive reasons. First, the distribution of responses warrants a

C. Mancini, R.T. Shields / Journal of Criminal Justice 42 (2014) 221232

dichotomous coding for condence in the Church.5 Separately, from a

theoretical context, this coding separates those with no or little condence from those with signicantly greater condence, and thus allows
for a direct test of the studys research questions.6
Media exposure effects
Follow coverage
Scholars of media cultivation theory have emphasized that the
amount of actual exposure is inuential in shaping opinions about
crime and justice. Here, the specic measure gauging the extent of
exposure was, How closely have you been following the news
about the recent reports of past sexual abuse of children by Catholic
priestsvery closely, somewhat closely, not very closely, or not at
all? This variable was coded dichotomously to isolate those who
more closely followed the reports (0 = not very closely/not at all,
1 = somewhat closely/very closely).
Fairness of coverage
Equally important to public views might be perceptions of the
coverage (Kiousis, 2001). That is, respondents who believe that the
media portrayals unfairly targeted the Catholic Church might discount the content of the reports, or question their accuracy. As a
result, coverage might not shape particularly negative views about
the Church. Fortunately, the poll included a measure designed to tap
into this perception. Americans were asked, Compared to the way
the news media have treated other religions, have the news media
been harder on the Catholic Church, easier on the Catholic Church, or
have they treated it the same as other religions? Responses were
coded dichotomously where, 0 = easier on Church/the same and
1 = harder on the Church.
Religiosity mediator (Catholic sample only)
Religiosity is included as a mediator only for the Catholic sample.
As mentioned previously, the logic for including this factor is theoretical. Per the substitution thesis, less religious Catholics might have
a greater reliance on media reports to learn about the sexual abuse
allegations, and so among this group, we can expect that media exposure would affect views more strongly. Among the very devout
Catholics, it is likely that media effects will matter less in shaping
opinions about the Church. Thus, active Catholics will have greater
experiential knowledge (by dint of attending mass regularly, for
example) to draw on to learn about aspects of the scandal. In testing
religiosity effects, we developed a religiosity index. It includes four indicators of religiosity used in prior studies (see e.g., Evans, Cullen,
Dunaway, & Burton, 1995; Johnson, Jang, Larson, & Li, 2001). The
rst measured prior nancial support to the Church. The survey
asked, During the last 12 months, have you or other family members
in your household given money to a Catholic parish or any other
Catholic organization, or not? Respondents could choose 1 = yes
or 0 = no.
The second variable tapped into frequency of Church attendance.
The specic question was, Would you say you attend Mass more
than once a week, once a week, once or twice a month, a few times
a year, or never? Respondents could report, 1 = more than once a
week, 2 = once a week, 3 = once or twice a month, 4 = a
few times a year, or 5 = never. To isolate those who attend frequently versus those who do not, this variable was recoded as
1 = at least once a week and 0 = less than once weekly.
The survey also inquired about the prominence of religion in ones
life. This attitudinal measure was developed by asking, How important is religion in your daily life? Is it extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not at all important? Respondents
could report, 1 = extremely important, 2 = very important,
3 = somewhat important, or 4 = not at all important. To

227

separate those groups to whom religion is most important, these categories were recoded so that 1 = extremely important or very important, and 0 = somewhat/not at all important.
The nal indicator evaluated the extent to which respondents
self-identied as being a strong Catholic. The specic measure
was, Do you think of yourself as a strong Catholic, or a not very
strong Catholic? Here, survey responses were dichotomous where,
1 = strong Catholic, and 0 = not very strong Catholic. The nal
step in calculating the index involved summing responses from the
four measures. This coding strategy resulted in a ve category religiosity variable where higher values correspond with greater religiosity. Results from a Cronbachs alpha test indicate acceptable reliability
among these indicators (alpha = 0.74; Nunnally, 1978).
Controls
Analyses include a number of controls shown to be important
in prior research, including age (1 = 18-29, 2 = 30-44, 3 =
45-64, 4 = over 64), sex (0 = female, 1 = male), race (0 =
non-White, 1 = White), Latino ethnicity (0 = no, 1 = yes),
education (1 = less than high school degree, 2 = high school degree, 3 = some college, 4 = college graduate, 5 = graduate
work or degree), political ideology (0 = not political conservative,
1 = political conservative), income income (1 = less than
$15,000-$30,000, 2 = $31,000-$50,000, 3 = $51,000-$75,000,
4 = $76,000-$100,000, 5 = over $100,000), and parent of a
young child (0 = no, 1 = yes).
Analytic plan
The analyses are presented in several steps. First, descriptive statistics for the Non-Catholic sample and the Catholic sample are
presented. These values show the extent of condence the public
has in the Church to prevent sex crime in the future, descriptive information of the media coverage variables, and the social and demographic characteristics of these two samples.
To test media consumption effects, the second stage involves estimating a series of logistic regression analyses. For the non-Catholic sample, three models are presented (Table 2). They estimated the effects of
exposure to news coverage and perceptions of the coverage on public
condence with the inclusion of theoretically important controls (age,
sex, race, ethnicity, educational attainment, political ideology, income,
and parental status). These three models were then repeated for the
Catholic sample (Table 3). Table 3 also provides a fourth model that estimated the mediating effect of Catholic religiosity on public condence.
Findings
We turn rst to descriptive statistics presented in Table 1. As
inspection of the table shows, most AmericansNon-Catholics and
Catholicsendorse positive views of the Church. However, a larger
percentage of Catholics (85%), compared to non-Catholics (52%)
were more strongly convinced the Church can effectively address
sex crime in the future. When focusing on media consumption, differences are also apparent between non-Catholics and Catholics. Fewer
non-Catholics (69%) followed coverage closely compared to Catholics
(82%). Pronounced differences also existed in perceptions of whether
the news media were biased against the Catholic Church. Here, more
Catholics assessed media coverage as biased (66%) compared to
non-Catholics (30%).
We now turn to results of the multivariate analysis in Tables 2
and 3 and the studys rst research questionhow does media
consumption affect perceptions of the Catholic Church?7 Broadly,
following news coverage exerts a signicant impact on views about
the Church for Catholic Americans (Table 3, model 1), but has no effect on non-Catholics assessment of the Church (Table 2, model 1).

228

C. Mancini, R.T. Shields / Journal of Criminal Justice 42 (2014) 221232

Table 1
Descriptive statistics
Non-Catholic Sample

Dependent variable
Condence in Church to prevent sex crime
(0 = not much/none, 1 = some/a lot)
Media consumption variables
Followed coverage about scandal (0 = not very closely/not at all, 1 = somewhat closely/very closely)
Bias of coverage (0 = easier on Church/the same, 1 = harder on Church)
Religiosity mediator (Catholic sample only)
Religiosity (0 = low, . . ., 4 = high)
Control variables
Age (1 = 18-29, 2 = 30-44,...4 = over 64)
Sex (0 = female, 1 = male)
Race (0 = non-White, 1 = White)
Latino ethnicity (0 = no, 1 = yes)
Education (1 = less than high school degree, 2 = high school degree,. . ., 5 = graduate degree)
Political ideology (0 = not conservative, 1 = conservative)
Income (1 = less than $15,000 to 30,000, . . . , 5 = more than $100,000)
Parent of young child (0 = no, 1 = yes)

Furthermore, the direction of this signicant impact for Catholics is

positive, not negative as initially hypothesized. For non-Catholics,
media consumption about the scandal did not signicantly impact
views about the Church in either direction. Thus, no support is
found for the studys rst hypothesis; in contrast, greater support is
found for the competing theory, the boomerang perspective, among
the Catholic sample.
As scholars of media effects have emphasized, perceptions of the
media reportsas fair or biasedmight also affect audience views of
media messages (Kiousis, 2001; Lee, 2010). This point brings us to
the studys second questiondo perceptions of the coverage (as
biased or fair and balanced) impact public condence? By and large,
the results indicate, yes. Across both samples (model 2 in Tables 2
and 3) the perception of biased coverage is associated with an increased likelihood of feeling condent about the Churchs efforts to
prevent sex crime among the public. Specically, non-Catholics were
signicantly more likely to express positive views of the Church if
they viewed the coverage as biased (OR = 2.02). Similarly, Catholics
who viewed the media coverage as biased against the Church were
also more likely to report believing the Church is capable of preventing
sexual abuse (OR = 3.50). Notably, this effect remains signicant even
with the inclusion of having followed the coverage (model 3 in Tables 2
and 3). This nding is at odds with the studys second hypothesisor
Table 2
Logistic regression of media effects on public condence (non-Catholic sample)
Model 1
b
Media Effects
Followed
0.22
Bias
Controls
Age
-0.15
Sex
0.41
Race
-0.41
Latino
-1.28
Education
-0.13
Pol. ideology 0.51
Income
0.06
Parent
0.05
Intercept
0.58
0.07
Nagelkerke R2
N
598

Model 2
Odds
Ratio

Model 3
Odds
Ratio

(0.19) 1.25
0.70 (0.20) 2.02**
(0.09)
(0.17)
(0.23)
(0.40)
(0.08)
(0.18)
(0.07)
(0.19)
(0.38)

0.86
1.51*
0.67
0.28**
0.88
1.67**
1.06
1.06
1.79

-0.04 (0.10)
0.35 (0.18)
-0.62 (0.25)
-1.36 (0.41)
-0.21 (0.09)
0.42 (0.18)
0.10 (0.07)
0.02 (0.20)
0.66 (0.39)
0.09
570

0.95
1.45
0.54*
0.26**
0.81*
1.52*
1.10
1.02
1.93

Odds
Ratio

0.29 (0.20) 1.33

0.69 (0.20) 2.00**
-0.08
0.35
-0.62
-1.39
-0.21
0.42
0.10
0.01
0.54
0.09
569

(0.10)
(0.18)
(0.25)
(0.41)
(0.09)
(0.18)
(0.07)
(0.20)
(0.40)

0.93
1.42*
0.54*
0.25**
0.81*
1.52*
1.11
1.01
1.71

* p .05 ** p .01 *** p .001.

Note: Unstandardized coefcients (with standard errors in parentheses) and odds
ratios are presented.

Catholic Sample

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

0.52

0.50

756

0.85

0.36

218

0.69
0.30

0.46
0.46

813
751

0.82
0.66

0.39
0.48

225
217

2.43

1.42

215

2.51
0.46
0.96
0.17
2.99
0.43
2.92
0.70

1.01
0.50
0.20
0.38
1.10
0.50
1.40
0.46

223
225
204
224
224
207
206
224

2.39
0.49
0.82
0.12
2.78
0.40
2.41
0.64

1.04
0.50
0.39
0.32
1.15
0.49
1.34
0.48

815
820
731
810
817
769
743
820

the belief that assessments of biased coverage would not be associated

with negative views of the Church. Thus, unlike what was initially
hypothesized, this nding that those who assessed the coverage as
biased and therefore untrustworthy, would discount the content of
the reports altogether indicates that perceptions of the coverage,
and not simply consumption of it, are associated with a greater likelihood of increased public condence in the Church. Collectively, ndings
across both groups indicate greater support for the boomerang theory
of media consumption than for media cultivation.
Since media consumption effects are differentially experienced
by diverse populations, we turn now to the studys third research
question: are similar patterns of media effects evident across the
non-Catholic and Catholic groups? The answer is mixed, providing
partial support for the variable interpretation theory (Weitzer
& Kubrin, 2004) and the studys third hypothesis. For example, although perceptions of media coverage exerted the same effect on
non-Catholic (OR = 2.00) and Catholic (OR = 4.25) public opinion,
media consumption among non-Catholics did not signicantly alter
views about the Church. Media consumption was, however, associated
with greater condence among Catholics (OR = 4.18). Taken together,
these ndings indicate support for the boomerang theory of media
exposure. Respondents who viewed media reporting of the Church
sex abuse scandal as biased did not express negative opinions about
the Churchs ability to prevent sexual abuse in the future, but rather,
were more likely to endorse positive views of the Church. This effect
was particularly consistent among Catholics who also followed news
coverage of the scandal as well.
The fourth research questiondoes religiosity among Catholics mediate the impact of media effects on public condenceis addressed in
Table 3, model 4. Inspection of the model indicates that religiosity
serves to reduce the effect of media exposure. To illustrate, consider
the magnitude of the two media coefcientsconsumption and bias
perceptionon condence across models 3 and 4. Although these effects are associated with increased odds in condence among highly
religious Catholics (model 4), these effects (OR = 3.45 and 3.51, respectively), are not as great as those observed among the low/
moderately religious Catholic group (model 3; OR = 4.18 and 4.25, respectively). These ndings support the studys fourth hypothesis and
the substitution thesis. Put differently, they lend credence to the idea
that among the very religious and active Catholics media consumption
might be less inuential in shaping views as this population is more
strongly bonded to the Church. In turn, it is conceivable that this
group privileges experiential or direct knowledge about the Church
over media reports in their efforts to learn about and understand the
sexual abuse allegations.

C. Mancini, R.T. Shields / Journal of Criminal Justice 42 (2014) 221232

229

Table 3
Logistic regression of media effects on public condence (Catholic sample)
Model 1
b
Media Effects
Followed
Bias
Mediator
Religiosity
Controls
Age
Sex
Race
Latino
Education
Pol. ideology
Income
Parent
Intercept
Nagelkerke R2
N

1.09 (0.52)

Model 2
Odds Ratio

2.98*
1.25 (0.46)

0.08 (0.26)
-0.11 (0.45)
-1.33 (1.44)
1.25 (0.98)
0.10 (0.24)
0.52 (0.47)
-0.14 (0.18)
-0.25 (0.53)
1.79 (1.81)
0.10
166

Model 3
Odds Ratio

1.08
0.90
0.27
3.48
1.10
1.68
0.87
0.77
5.99

0.06 (0.26)
0.12 (0.46)
-1.48 (1.47)
1.04 (1.00)
0.10 (0.24)
0.41 (0.47)
-0.11 (0.18)
-0.09 (0.53)
1.94 (1.85)
0.13
163

1.43 (0.55)
1.45 (0.48)

3.50**

1.06
1.13
0.23
2.84
1.10
1.51
0.90
0.91
6.93

-0.05 (0.27)
0.22 (0.48)
-1.80 (1.51)
0.91 (1.02)
-0.01 (0.25)
0.42 (0.49)
-0.16 (0.19)
0.01 (0.55)
1.69 (1.87)
0.19
163

Model 4
Odds Ratio
4.18**
4.25**

0.95
1.24
0.17
2.48
0.99
1.52
0.85
1.01
5.44

Odds Ratio

1.23 (0.59)
1.26 (0.51)

3.45*
3.51*

0.45 (0.17)

1.57**

-0.22 (0.29)
0.24 (0.52)
-2.45 (2.10)
0.67 (1.05)
-0.09 (0.26)
0.32 (0.53)
-0.22 (0.20)
0.06 (0.59)
2.58 (2.41)
0.26
159

0.80
1.26
0.09
1.94
0.91
1.38
0.80
1.06
13.15

* p .05 ** p .01 *** p .001.

Note: Unstandardized coefcients (with standard errors in parentheses) and odds ratios are presented.

Finally, several patterns emerged when examining the effects

of sociodemographic indicators on views of the Church. As shown in
model 3 (Table 2), among non-Catholics, males (OR = 1.42) and political conservatives (OR = 1.52) were more likely to report condence in the Churchs ability to prevent future sex crimes involving
members of the clergy. On the other hand, Whites, Latinos, and
those with higher levels of education were less likely to endorse
this level of condence in the Church. No control variables were signicant in the Catholic model.8
Conclusion and discussion
Sex crimes appear to have captured a signicant amount of public attention over the last two decades (Leon, 2011; Levenson, Brannon,
Fortney, & Baker, 2007; Sample & Kadleck, 2008). Illustrative of
this spotlight has been the recent and intense media reporting of sexual
abuse within the Catholic Church (Terry, 2008). This study investigated
the effects of this coverage on public opinion about the Church. Three
ndings are notable. Contrasting with the media cultivation theory,
prior exposure to media reports of the scandal served to increase public
condence in the Church among Catholics. Additionally, Catholics and
non-Catholics who perceived the coverage as biased were signicantly
more condent that the Church could effectively respond to sex crime allegations in the future. Finally, religiosity mediated the effect of media
consumption on public views about sex crime prevention among Catholics. In particular, among the very devout Catholics media effects
mattered less in shaping views about the Church.
How can these media effects be explained? As discussed in the introduction, one possibility is that perhaps the media coverage of the allegations conveyed encouraging information about the Church; and so,
consumption shaped optimistic views about the Churchs ability to effectively respond to sexual abuse. Upon further reection, this argument is
questionable. To illustrate, the portrayal of the story indicates a distinctly
negative slant against the Church (Pew Research Center, 2010). For instance, the coverage of the story highlighted not only the appalling
cases [of child sexual abuse] and the incorrigibility of sex offenders
but, it also concentrated heavily on the systematic failures of the Church
to report the abuse to law enforcement (Finkelhor, 2003, p. 1227; see
also, Dorfman et al., 2012; Mahler, 2011). Thus, the view that potentially
encouraging information about the Church and its administration was relayed through news reporting does not appear to be a persuasive argument in interpreting positive media effects.
A second and more convincing explanation derives from a competing theory of media consumption. Study ndings are particularly

supportive of the boomerang effects framework, which suggests

that negative attention to a particular issue can potentially backre
in shaping public perceptions. In response, audience members assume a defensive stance to the coverage and adopt views contrary
to the media message. Relatedly, perceptions of bias in reporting
may cause members to question the accuracy of the message and endorse the opposite logic.
To be sure, our study is limited in some respects. First, the use
of cross-sectional data means we have captured only a snap-shot of
public views. While we have outlined how 2010 data were strategic for
addressing our research questions, the use of longitudinal data is of
course preferred. The consequence is that we cannot determine the
exact causal order of this relationship. Although we argue that media consumption inuences attitudes toward the Church, it is also possible that
views of the Church inuences media consumption, in that individuals
with positive associations of the Church may be less likely to endorse
the views of the media. This alternative hypothesis does not however derail the argument that media consumption is a nuanced process. Rather, it
provides yet another example of how consumers engage and process
media messages differently. To be sure, unpacking this relationship further is an important avenue for future research on the effects of media
coverage on public opinion about crime.9
Second, our indicator of media coverage was restricted. That is,
the data did not include precise estimates of media report consumption about the scandal (e.g., ve reports a month), or the extent to
how important the coverage was to respondents (i.e., whether respondents prioritized media coverage over other types of knowledge).
Along a similar line, the data did not include intervening measures
that would allow us to determine what aspects of media reporting
constituted perceptions of unfair coverage. Despite these limitations, the current study represents a rst step effort in identifying
how Americans respond to media coverage of a highly publicized
sexual abuse scandal, and the extent to which they hold negative
views toward organizations in which the abuse occurs.
Under that backdrop, we turn now to theoretical and research
implications of the study. One theoretical implication would involve
testing competing theories about media consumption within a criminal justice context. With few exceptions, it has been assumed that the
media exerts a particularly negative inuence on public views about
crime and the criminal justice system (Roberts, Stalans, Indermaur,
& Hough, 2003; Surette, 2007), and so this prior work has centered
on media cultivation effects. However, some emerging work indicates
that even highly publicized criminal/corruption scandals might not
negatively impact public views about government (Shah, Watts,

230

C. Mancini, R.T. Shields / Journal of Criminal Justice 42 (2014) 221232

Domke, & Fan, 2002) or the criminal justice system (Mancini & Mears,
2013). The question, however, is what cognitive processes account for
these null or even positive effects of media exposure? Since few studies have tested competing media frameworks, this remains an important unaddressed empirical question.
Another implication relates to the variable interpretation hypothesis.
As study results indicate, media consumption does not exert uniform
effects on public views. Rather, cleavages exist in public perceptions.
Reports of crime-related scandals which occur in organizations might impact some groups more strongly than others. At the same time, the type
of scandal might matter. For example, Weitzer and Tuchs (2004) nding
that the impact of exposure to media coverage of incidents involving police misconduct negatively affected minorities attitudes toward law enforcement, but not other groups views indicates that the effect of
coverage might be moderated by social and demographic factors. Potential variability in media consumption is an issue per scholars that has
been insufciently theorized and examined (Eschholz, Blackwell, Gertz,
& Chiricos, 2002; Weitzer & Tuch, 2004). Future efforts would ideally
work toward identifying and explaining those factors which appear to
impact the effect of media consumption on public attitudes.
Along a similar line, future research would test whether audience
perceptions of the coverageas fair and balanced, biased, accurate,
or politicaland not simply consumption of it affect or mediate
attitudes; and also, what accounts for this process; ideally, this would
be accomplished using longitudinal data that consistently tracks public
views. The current study found support for a strong boomerang effect
among non-Catholics and Catholics when coverage was perceived as
unfair or biased. It is unclear what coverage constitutes biased coverage in the minds of the public. For example, is this assessment related to
the presentation of the facts of the issue, how the media conveyed the
story, whether the media politicized the issue, or simply, as a result of
disproportionate media attention? Our ndings indicate that the public
does in fact make judgments about how media coverage is packaged,
and these views signicantly impact perceptions of the issue conveyed
by the media. What remains missing is an assessment from a criminological and longitudinal perspective of what factors inuence the credibility of media reports about crime among the public. At the same time,
the form of media might impact these judgments. For example, Kiousis
(2001) in a study of media consumption and perceived credibility
reported that the public endorsed greater trust toward newspaper reports than toward online or television news. Given the frequency and
nature of crime reporting and its inuence on public views over time,
this line of investigation should be considered.
Finally, research should examine public opinion about organizational responses to sex crime. Recently, several disturbing accounts
of sexual abuse allegations at universities and other organizations
have been reported by the media (Dorfman et al., 2012). Similar to the
Catholic Church scandal, these cases involved allegations of concealment among high-level administrators. Despite the emerging media
focus on sex abuse within social organizations, little is known of public
reactions toward these cases. It is this institutional response to sex offenders that has become a prominent feature of nightly news and critique by members of the community. Anecdotal evidence suggests
that the public not only expects public institutions to prevent sex
crime, but when it occurs, the public wants the issue to be immediately
addressed and rectied (Cover-ups, 2012; Mahler, 2011). However,
little empirical work exists that examines public attitudes about institutional sexual abuse and the extent to which these organizations are seen
as responsible for identifying, reporting, and preventing sex offending.
The pronounced media attention given to the Catholic Church
abuse scandal underscores the salience of sex crime in the U.S.
Despite this inuence, criminologists know little about the precise
impact of media coverage on public opinion and judgments about
sex offenses and offenders. What this implies is that greater attention
toward measuring the nuances of media consumption marks a critical
step in understanding complex views about sexual offending.

Acknowledgements
We thank Dr. Jill Levenson for her thoughtful suggestions on an
earlier draft and the anonymous reviewers and Editors of this special
issue for consideration of the study. In addition, we also extend our
sincere appreciation to Dr. Daniel P. Mears for his continued mentorship and guidance.
Notes
1. To be clear, the John Jay College Research Team (2006) study relied on responses
from Church administrators to estimate prevalence of sexual abuse. These responses
reect known reports of sexual offending, and are likely underestimates of the extent
of sexual abuse within the Church over a 50 year period. They are however among the
only published indicators of the national extent of sexual abuse within the Catholic
Church.
2. Although cross-sectional data are limited as they provide only a snap-shot of
public views, we believe the use of 2010 data for this study is strategic for two reasons.
First, while it appears that the Catholic Church sexual abuse scandal attracted the most
media attention in 2002, coverage since then has been fairly consistent, garnering a
similar number of news stories in major newspapers on average, with evidence that reports have increased toward the turn of the decade (see Fig. 1). Thus, reliance on 2010
data ensures that we are tapping into a recent and pivotal era of public opinion toward
the Church. Second, our data were collected prior to the Pennsylvania State University
sexual abuse scandal (and subsequent scandals). We see this as a clear strength in that
our analyses are not unduly biased by these high prole cases (which did not involve
the Catholic Church). Thus, our analyses capture public views about the Catholic
Church before the impact of other highly publicized sexual abuse cases, which could
arguably slant views against the Church.
3. Emerging empirical evidence indicates that low response rates might not significantly bias study results. For example, a recent investigation found that despite declining response rates, telephone surveys that include landlines and cell phones and
are weighted to match the demographic composition of the population continue to
provide accurate data on most political, social and economic measures . . . comport
[ing] with the consistent record of accuracy achieved by major polls when it comes
to estimating election outcomes, among other things (Pew Research Center, 2012,
p. 1; see also AAPOR, 2012).
4. The sample over-represents adults between the ages of 18 and 44. However, this
over-representation is not expected to signicantly inuence study results as prior research has not demonstrated a consistent link between age and views about crime
(Sotirovic, 2001) or crime policy (Mandracchia, Shaw, & Morgan, 2013; McCorkle,
1993; Payne, Gainey, Triplett, & Danner, 2004; Rossi & Berk, 1997).
5. The original distribution of the condence variable was: 14.5% of respondents
reported a lot of condence; 40% reported some condence; 23.7% reported not much
condence; 15.1% reported no condence; and 6.8% did not answer the question.
6. Prior research indicates that ordinary least squares (OLS), ordinal, and binary logistic regression analyses typically generate similar results (Kromrey & RendinaGobioff, 2002). To ensure that the modeling approach did not bias our results, analyses
were estimated using ordinary least squares (OLS) regression and ordinal regression.
Results were similar across these different models. Binary logistic regression analyses
are presented for ease of interpretation and also because this approach allows for us
to best address the studys research questions.
7. Multicollinearity did not appear to bias study results. Tolerance levels for all
models were consistently above 0.73 and variance ination factor (VIF) values did
not exceed 1.40.
8. Unlike R2 in OLS regression which measures the proportion of variance
explained by the model, pseudo R2 statistics, like Nagelkerkes R2, do not report the
explained variance or goodness-of-t (Chao-Ying, Kuk, & Ingersoll, 2002) but rather
are best seen as measuring effect sizes, or how useful the independent variables are
in predicting the outcome measure (Bewick, Cheek, & Ball, 2005). In the analyses
presented here, the Catholic sample (Table 3, Model 4) has the largest pseudo R2
(Nagelkerke R2 = 0.26). This may be due to greater homogeneity of the Catholic sample; however, caution should be exercised when comparing pseudo R2 statistics across
samples.
9. We thank an anonymous reviewer for encouraging us to highlight this point.

References
Administration for Children and Families (1996). Third National Incidence Study of Child
Abuse and Neglect (NIS-3). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services.
Administration for Children and Families (2010). National Incidence Study of Child
Abuse and Neglect (NIS-4), 2004-2009. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services.
American Association for Public Opinion Research (2004). Standard denitions: Final
dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys. Ann Arbor, MI: Author.
American Association for Public Opinion Research (2012). Response rate: An overview.
Ann Arbor, MI: Author.
Bewick, V., Cheek, L., & Ball, J. (2005). Statistics review 14: Logistic regression. Critical
Care, 9, 112118.
Bolen, R., & Scannapieco, M. (1999). Prevalence of child sexual abuse: A corrective
meta-analysis. The Social Service Review, 73, 281313.

C. Mancini, R.T. Shields / Journal of Criminal Justice 42 (2014) 221232

Bolton, L. E., Cohen, J. B., & Bloom, P. N. (2006). Does marketing products as remedies
create Get out of jail free cards? Journal of Consumer Research, 33, 7181.
Boston Globe spotlight investigation: Abuse in the Catholic Church (2004). Boston
Globe. Retrieved from http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/
Burns, J. F. (2012, October 24). BBC leader admits horror as a sexual abuse inquiry
opens. New York Times, p. A6.
Bushman, B. J., & Stack, A. D. (1996). Forbidden fruit versus tainted fruit: Effects
of warning labels on attraction to television violence. Journal of Experimental
Psychology. Applied, 2, 207226.
Chao-Ying, J. P., Kuk, L. L., & Ingersoll, G. (2002). An introduction to logistic regression
analysis and reporting. The Journal of Educational Research, 96, 314.
Cheit, R. E., Shavit, Y., & Reiss-Davis, Z. (2010). Magazine coverage of child sexual
abuse, 1992-2004. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 19, 99117.
Chiricos, T., Eschholz, S., & Gertz, M. (1997). Crime, news, and fear of crime: Toward an
identication of audience effects. Social Problems, 44, 342357.
Chiricos, T., Padgett, K., & Gertz, M. (2000). Fear, TV news, and the reality of crime.
Criminology, 38, 755785.
Cover-ups, justice, and reform. [Editorial]. (2012, July 9). New York Times, p. A18.
Dills, A. K., & Hernndez-Julin, R. (2012). Negative publicity and Catholic schools.
Economic Inquiry, 50, 143152.
Dokecki, P. R. (2004). The clergy sexual abuse crisis: Reform and renewal in the Catholic
community. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Dorfman, L., Mejia, P., Gonzalez, P., & Cheyne, A. (2012). Breaking news on child sexual
abuse: Early coverage of Penn State. Berkeley: Berkeley Media Studies Group.
Dowler, K. (2003). Media consumption and public attitudes toward crime and justice:
The relationship between fear of crime, punitive attitudes, and perceived police
effectiveness. Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, 10, 109126.
Ennett, S. T., Rosenbaum, D. P., Flewelling, R. L., Bieler, G. S., Ringwalt, C. L., & Bailey, S. L.
(1994). Long-term evaluation of drug abuse resistance education. Addictive Behaviors,
19, 113125.
Erceg-Hurn, D. M. (2008). Drugs, money, and graphic ads: A critical review of the
Montana Meth Project. Prevention Science, 9, 256263.
Eschholz, S., Blackwell, B., Gertz, M., & Chiricos, T. (2002). Race and attitudes toward
the police: Assessing the effects of watching reality police programs. Journal of
Criminal Justice, 30, 327341.
Evans, T. D., Cullen, F. T., Dunaway, R. G., & Burton, V. (1995). Religion and crime
reexamined: The impact of religion, secular controls, and social ecology on adult
criminality. Criminology, 33, 195224.
Finkelhor, D. (2003). The legacy of the clergy abuse scandal. Child Abuse & Neglect, 27,
12251229.
Finkelhor, D., Hotaling, G., Lewis, I. A., & Smith, C. (1990). Sexual abuse in a national
survey of adult men and women: Prevalence, characteristics, and risk factors.
Child Abuse & Neglect, 14, 1928.
Firestone, P., Moulden, H. M., & Wexler, A. F. (2009). Clerics who commit sexual offenses:
Offender, offense, and victim characteristics. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 18, 442454.
Fox, R. L., Van Sickel, R. W., & Steiger, T. L. (2007). Tabloid justice: Criminal justice in an
age of media frenzy, (2nd ed.). Boulder, CO: Rienner.
Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., & Signorielli, N. (1980). The mainstreaming of
America: Violence Prole, no. 11. Journal of Communication, 30, 1029.
Gray, M. M., & Perl, P. M. (2006). Catholic reactions to the news of sexual abuse cases involving
Catholic clergy. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate.
Gunter, B. (1987). Television and the fear of crime. London: John Libbey.
Heath, L., & Gilbert, K. (1996). Mass media and fear of crime. American Behavioral
Scientist, 39, 379386.
Hornik, R., Jacobsohn, L., Orwin, R., Piesse, A., & Kalton, G. (2008). Effects of the National
Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign on youths. American Journal of Public Health, 98,
22292236.
Howden, L. M., & Meyer, J. A. (2011). Age and sex composition: 2010. Washington, D.C.:
United States Census Bureau.
Humes, K. R., Jones, N. A., & Ramirez, R. R. (2011). Overview of race and Hispanic origin:
2010. Washington, D.C.: United States Census Bureau.
Hurwitz, J., & Pefey, M. (1997). Public perceptions of race and crime: The role of racial
stereotypes. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 375401.
Jenkins, P. (1995). Clergy sexual abuse: The symbolic politics of a social problem. In J.
Best (Ed.), Images of issues (pp. 105130) (2nd ed.). New York: Aldine.
Jenkins, P. (1996). Pedophiles and priests: Anatomy of a contemporary crisis. Bridgewater,
NJ: Replica Books.
John Jay College Research Team (2006). The nature and scope of sexual abuse of minors
by Catholic priests and deacons in the United States, 1950-2002. Washington, D.C.:
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Johnson, K. (2012, October 19). Newly released Boy Scout les give glimpse into
20 years of sexual abuse. New York Times, p. A20.
Johnson, B., Jang, S. J., Larson, D., & Li, S. (2001). Does adolescent religious commitment
matter? A reexamination of the effects of religiosity on delinquency. Journal of
Research in Crime and Delinquency, 38, 2244.
Kiousis, S. (2001). Public trust or mistrust? Perceptions of media credibility in the
information age. Mass Communication and Society, 4, 381403.
Kromrey, J. D., & Rendina-Gobioff, G. (2002). An empirical comparison of regression analysis strategies with discrete ordinal variables. Multiple Linear Regression Viewpoints,
28, 3043.
Langevin, R., Curnoe, S., & Bain, J. (2000). A study of clerics who commit sexual offenses:
Are they different from other sex offenders? Child Abuse & Neglect, 24, 535545.
Lee, T. (2010). Why they dont trust the media: An examination of factors predicting
trust. American Behavioral Scientist, 58, 821.
Leon, C. (2011). The contexts and politics of evidence-based sex offender policy.
Criminology and Public Policy, 10, 421430.

231

Levenson, J. S., Brannon, Y. N., Fortney, T., & Baker, J. (2007). Public perceptions about
sex offenders and community protection policies. Analyses of Social Issues and
Public Policy, 7, 125.
Lussier, P., & Mathesius, J. (2012). Criminal achievement, criminal career initiation, and
detection avoidance: The onset of successful sex offending. Journal of Crime and
Justice, 35, 376394.
Mahler, J. (2011, November 8). Grand experiment meets an inglorious end. New York
Times, p. B12.
Mancini, C., & Mears, D. P. (2013). The effect of agency scandal on public views toward
the correctional system. Criminal Justice Review, 38, 528.
Mandracchia, J. T., Shaw, L. B., & Morgan, R. D. (2013). Whats with the attitude? Changing
attitudes about criminal justice issues. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 40, 95113.
Marshall, P. (1997). The prevalence of convictions for sexual offending, (Vol. 55), London:
Home Ofce.
McCorkle, R. C. (1993). Research note: Punish and rehabilitate? Public attitudes toward
six common crimes. Crime & Delinquency, 39, 240252.
McGlone, G. J. (2003). Prevalence and incidence of Roman Catholic clerical sex
offenders. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 10, 111121.
Mercado, C. C., Tallon, J. A., & Terry, K. J. (2008). Persistent sexual abusers in the
Catholic Church: An examination of characteristics and offense patterns. Criminal
Justice and Behavior, 35, 629642.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory, (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Otterman S., & Rivera, R. (2012, May 10). Ultra-Orthodox shun their own for reporting
child sex abuse. New York Times, p. A1.
Payne, B. K., Gainey, R. R., Triplett, R. A., & Danner, M. J. E. (2004). What drives punitive
beliefs? Demographic characteristics and justications for sentencing. Journal of
Criminal Justice, 32, 195206.
Payne, B. K., Tewksbury, R., & Mustaine, E. E. (2010). Attitudes about rehabilitating sex
offenders: Demographic, victimization, and community-level inuences. Journal of
Criminal Justice, 38, 580588.
Perillo, A. D., Mercado, C. C., & Terry, K. J. (2008). Repeat offending, victim gender, and
extent of victim relationship in Catholic Church sexual abusers: Implications for
risk assessment. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 600614.
Pew Research Center (2010). The Pope meets the press: Media coverage of the clergy
abuse scandal. Washington, D.C.: Author.
Pew Research Center (2012). Assessing the representativeness of public opinion surveys.
Washington, D.C.: Author.
Piquero, A. R., Piquero, N. L., Terry, K. J., Youstin, T., & Nobles, M. (2008). Uncollaring the
criminal: Understanding criminal careers of criminal clerics. Criminal Justice and
Behavior, 35, 583599.
Plante, T. G., & Daniels, C. (2004). The sexual abuse crisis in the Roman Catholic Church:
What psychologists and counselors should know. Pastoral Psychology, 52, 381393.
Plante, T. G., & McChesney, K. (Eds.). (2011). Sexual abuse in the Catholic Church: A decade
of crisis, 2002-2012. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger/ABC-CLIO.
Quick, B. L., & Bates, B. R. (2010). The use of gain-or loss-frame messages and efcacy
appeals to dissuade excessive alcohol consumption among college students:
A test of psychological reactance theory. Journal of Health Communication, 15,
603628.
Robertiello, G., & Terry, K. J. (2007). Can we prole sex offenders? A review of sex
offender typologies. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12, 508518.
Roberts, J. V., Stalans, L. J., Indermaur, D., & Hough, M. (2003). Penal populism and public
opinion: Lessons from ve countries. Oxford: New York.
Rossetti, S. J. (1995). The impact of child sexual abuse on attitudes toward God and the
Catholic Church. Child Abuse & Neglect, 19, 14691481.
Rossi, P. H., & Berk, R. A. (1997). Just punishments: Federal guidelines and public views
compared. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Saad, L. (2012, January 12). Conservatives remain the largest ideological group in the
U.S. Retrieved from. http://www.gallup.com/poll/152021/conservatives-remainlargest-ideological-group.aspx
Sample, L. L., & Kadleck, C. (2008). Sex offender laws: Legislators accounts of the need
for policy. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 19, 4062.
Shah, D. V., Watts, M. D., Domke, D., & Fan, D. P. (2002). News framing and cueing
of issue regimes: Explaining Clintons public approval in spite of scandal. Public
Opinion Quarterly, 66, 339370.
Sipe, A. W. R. (1995). Sex, priests, and power: Anatomy of a crisis. New York: Brunner
Mazel.
Sotirovic, M. (2001). Affective and cognitive processes as mediators of media inuences on crime-policy preferences. Mass Communication and Society, 4, 311329.
Sullivan, J., & Beech, A. (2004). A comparative study of demographic data relating to
intra-and extra-familial child sexual abusers and professional perpetrators. Journal
of Sexual Aggression, 10, 3950.
Surette, R. (2007). Media, crime, and criminal justice: Images, realities, and policies, (3rd ed.).
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Cengage.
Terry, K. (2008). Stained glass: The nature and scope of child sexual abuse in the
Catholic Church. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 549569.
Terry, K., Smith, M. L., Schuth, K., Kelly, J. R., Vollman, B., & Massey, C. (2011). The causes
and context of sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests in the United States,
1950-2010. Washington, D.C.: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Weitzer, R., & Kubrin, C. E. (2004). Breaking news: How local TV news and real-word
conditions affect fear of crime. Justice Quarterly, 21, 497520.
Weitzer, R., & Tuch, S. A. (2004). Reforming the police: Racial differences in public
support for change. Criminology, 42, 391414.
West, S. L., & ONeal, K. K. (2004). Research and practice: Project D.A.R.E. outcome
effectiveness revisited. American Journal of Public Health, 94, 10271029.
Williams, T. (2012, September 20). Seeking to stem endless abuse of tribes children.
New York Times, p. A1.

232

C. Mancini, R.T. Shields / Journal of Criminal Justice 42 (2014) 221232

Christina Mancini, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor at Virginia Commonwealth

Universitys L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs. She received
her doctoral degree from Florida State Universitys College of Criminology and Criminal
Justice in 2009. Dr. Mancini has published several articles in Criminology, Crime &
Delinquency, and other crime and policy journals. She is currently involved in studies
examining the emergence and efcacy of sex offender policy, public opinion, race
and perceptions about offending, and violent victimization.

Ryan T. Shields, Ph.D., is an Assistant Scientist at Johns Hopkins Universitys

Bloomberg School of Public Health. He completed his doctoral degree in criminology
and criminal justice at Florida State University in 2013. His published research appears
in the Journal of Criminal Justice, Journal of Adolescent Health, Criminal Justice Policy Review, and other journals. Dr. Shields is currently examining sex offender punishment.
His research interests include sex offending, homicide, suicide, and the intersection
of criminology and public health.