Econ 138 Writing Assignment: DUE Mar 3 by 5PM PST on Canvas
Please read all instructions both before you begin the assignment and after you complete it. This assignment is meant to be completed individually and independently. You cannot work any other person on this assignment or discuss it with others. You can use ChatGPT or any other generative AI to help you. You can also consult outside sources (online or otherwise) but be careful not to plagiarize (see Academic Integrity section at the end of this document), and you must cite your sources. However, note that you should be able to complete this assignment without any outside sources. Please explain all your answers thoroughly.
In this writing assignment, you will analyze racial disparities in a data set about judge overrides in Alabama. These data have been slightly modified for educational purposes on this assignment but are based on real data. These judge overrides occur when a jury sentences a defendant to life in prison, but the judge did not follow their ruling and instead sentenced the defendant to the death penalty. Alabama is the only state that has regularly overridden jury decisions of life in prison in favor of the death penalty. It was also the last state to abolish this practice, ending it only in 2017. However, defendants in cases that were decided before 2017 may still face the death penalty in Alabama after the ruling. You can learn more about judge overrides in Alabama from the Equal Justice Initiative at this link: https://eji.org/reports/judge-override/.
Steps:
1. (a) Download the provided Excel data set. What percent of total cases involve a Black defendant? A White defendant?
(b) What percent of overridden cases involve a Black defendant? A White Defendant?
You can do these by hand or use the “COUNTIFS” function in Excel or any statistical software of your choice.
2. Are the differences you found in Step 1 between the total percentage of cases involving Black defendants and the percentage of overridden cases involving Black defendants sufficient to conclude that judges have racial bias? Explain your answers. (Suggested word count: 200).
3. Sort the data by judge. Find:
(a) A judge that you think exhibits evidence consistent with racial bias against Black or White defendants.
(b) A judge that is more lenient but unbiased.
(c) A judge that is more stringent but unbiased.
Explain each of your answers. (Suggested word count: 300 words).
4. (a) What percent of cases overseen by Black judges involve Black defendants?
(b) What percent of overridden cases overseen by Black judges involve Black defendants?
(c) What percent of cases overseen by White judges involve Black defendants?
(d) What percent of overridden cases overseen by White judges involve Black defendants?
5. Are your findings from Step 4 more consistent with statistical discrimination or taste-based discrimination? Use an argument in the style. of Antonovics and Knight (2009) to justify your answer. (Suggested word count: 300 words).
6. Find the percent of total cases with a:
(a) Black defendant and White victim
(b) Black defendant and Black victim
(c) White defendant and Black victim
(d) White defendant and White victim
7. Find the percent of overridden cases with a:
(a) Black defendant and White victim
(b) Black defendant and Black victim
(c) White defendant and Black victim
(d) White defendant and White victim
8. Building on your findings from steps 6 and 7, describe an analysis or experiment that will allow you to separately identify if judges exhibit bias against Black defendants and bias towards White victims. What other data/information would you need (if any) to perform. this analysis/experiment? Provide a detailed explanation of the steps you would follow and how you would interpret potential results. (Suggested word count: 500 words).
Format:
1. You should answer each step as a separate question in the text box provided. You do not need to write an introduction or conclusion. You do not need to restate the questions asked. Focus on the economics; we are not going to judge the quality of your writing (so long as it is readable and relatively typo free), but rather the quality of the economic thought behind them. Write freely and then revise to express your ideas clearly and concisely.
2. Suggested word counts are there as a guide, but we will not take of points for being over/under the word count, so long as you have answered the questions thoroughly and completely.
3. You can write in the first person, using “I” statements.
4. Please follow APA style. when discussing different racial/ethnic groups. Current APA style. recommends using “South Asian people”, “South Asian Americans”, “South Asian folks”, etc. , rather than “South Asians”, for example. Use race/ethnicity in this way as a descriptor rather than as a noun for all groups. Additionally, always capitalize Black, White, Hispanic, Asian, etc.
5. You can cite any outside sources you use in Chicago, MLA, or whatever format you prefer. As long as we can find the source and read it, we won’t take off points for the style. of your bibliography. Note that you should be able to complete this assignment without any outside sources.
6. Grading: The points are distributed across questions as follows. There is partial credit within questions, but no partial credit will be given for answers without evidence or careful reasoning. We will follow the below rubric. There is no partial credit within any of the subsections unless otherwise stated. We will take off 20 points (50%) for late submissions and we reserve the right to take off additional points for assignments that did not follow the formatting guidelines.
|
Step 1
|
3 pts: part a (1.5 for each %)
3 pts: part b (1.5 for each %)
|
|
Step 2
|
4 pts: justification (2 pts partial)
|
|
Step 3
|
2 pts: part a
2 pts: part b
2 pts: part c
|
|
Step 4
|
1.5 pts: part a
1.5 pts: part b
1.5 pts: part c
1.5 pts: part d
|
|
Step 5
|
4 pts: justification (2 pts partial)
|
|
Step 6
|
1 pt: part a
1 pt: part b
1 pt: part c
1 pt: part d
|
|
Step 7
|
1 pt: part a
1 pt: part b
1 pt: part c
1 pt: part d
|
|
Step 8
|
6 pts: justification (2 or 4 pts partial)
|