Again, I don't think so. I mean, football is a contact sport, so you are actually allowed to hold, impede, hand check, body check, use your physical strength as an advantage, to a degree. And depending on the referee, depending on the day, some things are called, some are not. Inside the box, or outside of the box.
The main issue is that, yes, a call for a foul inside the box carries way more punishment in the form of a penalty. But in the same vein, for the most part, (except perhaps on set piece deliveries where holding and blocking are the norm) players are much more careful about going in for tackles in the box than they are outside of it.
In England especially, the game is allowed to be physical, and on several occasions during a game the referee waves play on for things I consider borderline or clear fouls outside the box as well.
Do I think their decisions are more highly scrutinized when the alleged foul occurs in the box? Of course. Do I think that necessarily causes them to referee the box differently? It shouldn't, and maybe it does for some, I don't think it does as a matter of fact for all referees.
