TESTING A BAYESIAN LEARNING THEORY OF DETERRENCE AMONG SERIOUS JUVENILE OFFENDERS*

The effect of criminal experience on risk perceptions is of central importance to deterrence theory but has been vastly understudied. This article develops a realistic Bayesian learning model of how individuals will update their risk perceptions over time in response to the signals they receive during their offending experiences. This model implies a simple function that we estimate to determine the deterrent effect of an arrest. We find that an individual who commits one crime and is arrested will increase his or her perceived probability of being caught by 6.3 percent compared with if he or she had not been arrested. We also find evidence that the more informative the signal received by an individual is, the more he or she will respond to it, which is consistent with more experienced offenders responding less to an arrest than less experienced offenders do. Parsing our results out by type of crime indicates that an individual who is arrested for an aggressive crime will increase both his or her aggressive crime risk perception as well as his or her income‐generating crime risk perception, although the magnitude of the former may be slightly larger. This implies that risk perception updating, and thus potentially deterrence, may be partially, although not completely, crime specific.     

TIME AGGREGATION AND TIME LAG IN MACRO-LEVEL DETERRENCE RESEARCH*

Recent arguments in research on individual-level deterrence suggest that the effect of perceived sanction risk on illegal behavior might occur over a shorter time period than the yearly lags typically incorporated in panel studies. This study raises the same issue for macro-level deterrence research by suggesting that panel studies using yearly data might have failed to capture the deterrent effect. The analysis uses ARIMA models with data aggregated monthly, quarterly, and semiannually to estimate the reciprocal effects between arrests and crimes for robbery, burglary, larceny, and auto theft in Oklahoma City from 1967 through 1989. No effect of crimes on arrests is found, but significant effects of arrests on crimes appear for three of the four offenses in the shorter temporal aggregations. The results suggest a need to reconsider conclusions based on panel studies that have used time aggregations and time lags that might be too long to uncover deterrent effects.     

ON AMBIGUITY IN PERCEPTIONS OF RISK:IMPLICATIONS FOR CRIMINAL DECISION MAKING AND DETERRENCE*

Deterrence theorists and researchers have argued that the critical dimension of sanction certainty is its level—increasing the certainty of punishment from a lower to a higher level will inhibit criminal conduct. However, the true certainty of punishment is rarely known with much precision. Both Sherman (1990) and Nagin (1998) have suggested that ambiguity about the level of punishment certainty is itself consequential in the decision to commit or refrain from crime. Here, we investigate this proposition. We find some evidence that individuals are “ambiguity averse” for decisions involving losses such as criminal punishments. This finding means that a more ambiguous perceived certainty of punishment is a greater deterrent of some crimes than a nominally equivalent but less ambiguous one. However, this effect depends on how large an individual's risk certainty perception is initially. That is, we find evidence for “boundary effects” (Casey and Scholz, 1991a, 1991b) in which this effect holds for lower probabilities but reverses for higher ones. For higher detection probabilities, individuals become “ambiguity seeking” such that a less ambiguous detection probability has more deterrent value than a nominally equivalent but more ambiguous detection probability. Results are presented from two distinct, but complementary, analysis samples and empirical approaches. These samples include a survey to college students with several hypothetical choice problems and data from the Pathways to Desistance study, a longitudinal investigation of serious adolescent offenders transitioning from adolescence to young adulthood.     

The deterrent effect of the perceived certainty and severity of punishment: A review of the evidence and issues

This paper critically examines the role of the perceived certainty and severity of punishment in deterring criminal/deviant behavior. A thorough review of the perceptual deterrence literature from 1972–1986 is provided which indicates that cross-sectional correlations between perceptions of sanction threats and self-reported criminal/deviant behavior are moderately negative for diverse offenses, consistent with the deterrence doctrine. It is noted that rather than expressing the deterrent effect, these correlations probably indicate the effect of prior behavior on currently held perceptions—the experiential effect. In addition, since in many instances the reported correlations express simple bivariate relationships, the association may be spurious rather than causal. When researchers employing panel designs have estimated the deterrent relationship with variables in their correct temporal ordering and with more fully specified causal models, the moderate inverse effect for both perceived certainty and severity disappears. Although this would argue strongly for the continued utilization of longitudinal data and fully developed models of deterrence/social control, recent commentaries have raised questions about this line of perceptual deterrence research. These arguments are assessed and an agenda for future deterrence research suggested.     

Deterrence and the tipping effect

Previous research has focused on certaintyznty of punishment as one. factor. upon which any dzterrent effect of punishment might be contingent and Auggested that it must reach a critical tipping level before the deterrent effect becomes evident. Using data on index crimes and clearance. rates for. Virginia cities and counties, bupport was found for both the. deterrent effect and the exlstenee of a tipping level. Attention was directed towand a more precise specification of the form of the tipping effect, suggesting that there is a single critical tipping level and that it occurs at a relatively low level of certainty of punihment.     

GHETTOS,THRESHOLDS, AND CRIME: DOES CONCENTRATED POVERTY REALLY HAVE AN ACCELERATING INCREASING EFFECT ON CRIME?*

Theories make varying predictions regarding the functional form of the relationship between neighborhood poverty and crime rates, ranging from a diminishing positive effect, to a linear positive effect, to an exponentially increasing or even threshold effect. Nonetheless, surprisingly little empirical evidence exists testing this functional form. This study estimates the functional form of the relationship between poverty and various types of serious crime in a sample of census tracts for 25 cities, and it finds that a diminishing positive effect most appropriately characterizes this relationship whether estimating the models nonparametrically or parametrically. Only for the crime of murder does some evidence exist of an accelerating effect, although this occurs in the range of 20 to 40 percent in poverty, with a leveling effect on crime beyond this point of very high poverty. Thus, no evidence is found here in support of the postulate of scholars extending William Julius Wilson's (1987) insight that neighborhoods with very high levels of poverty will experience an exponentially higher rate of crime compared with other neighborhoods.     

THE MISSING LINK IN GENERAL DETERRENCE RESEARCH*

Research on the deterrent effects of punishment falls into two categories: macro‐level studies of the impact of aggregate punishment levels on crime rates, and individual‐level studies of the impact of perceived punishment levels on self‐reported criminal behavior. For policy purposes, however, the missing link—ignored in previous research—is that between aggregate punishment levels and individual perceptions of punishment. This paper addresses whether higher actual punishment levels increase the perceived certainty, severity, or swiftness of punishment. Telephone interviews with 1,500 residents of fifty‐four large urban counties were used to measure perceptions of punishment levels, which were then linked to actual punishment levels as measured in official statistics. Hierarchical linear model estimates of multivariate models generally found no detectable impact of actual punishment levels on perceptions of punishment. The findings raise serious questions about deterrence‐based rationales for more punitive crime control policies.     

TOWARD A BIFURCATED THEORY OF EMOTIONAL DETERRENCE

Since Hobbes (1957 [1651] and Beccaria (1963 [1764]), scholars have theorized that the emotion of fear is critical for deterrence. Nevertheless, contemporary deterrence researchers have mostly overlooked the distinction between perceived sanction risk and fear of apprehension. Whereas perceived risk is a cognitive judgment, fear involves visceral feelings of anxiety or dread. Equally important, a theory explicating the influence of deterrence on both criminal propensity and situational offending has remained elusive. We develop a theoretical model in which perceived risk and fear are distinguished at both the general and situational levels. We test this theoretical model with data from a set of survey‐based experiments conducted in 2016 with a nationwide sample of adults (N = 965). We find that perceived risk and fear are empirically distinct and that perceived risk is positively related to fear at both the general and situational levels. Certain background and situational factors have indirect effects through perceived risk on fear. In turn, perceived risk has indirect effects through fear on both criminal propensity and situational intentions to offend. Fear's inclusion increases explanatory power for both criminal propensity and situational offending intentions. Fear is a stronger predictor than either self‐control or prior offending of situational intentions to offend.     

COLLECTIVE EFFICACY,AUTHORITATIVE PARENTING AND DELINQUENCY: A LONGITUDINAL TEST OF A MODEL INTEGRATING COMMUNITY‐AND FAMILY‐LEVEL PROCESSES*

In this paper, we develop and test hypotheses on how authoritative parenting and collective efficacy combine to increase a child's risk of affiliating with deviant peers and engaging in delinquent behavior. Analyses using two waves of data from a sample of several hundred African American caregivers and their children largely supported the predictions. Over time, increases in collective efficacy within a community were associated with increases in authoritative parenting. Further, both authoritative parenting and collective efficacy served to deter affiliation with deviant peers and involvement in delinquent behavior. Finally, there was evidence of an amplification process whereby the deterrent effect of authoritative parenting on affiliation with deviant peers and delinquency was enhanced when it was administered within a community with high collective efficacy.     

NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT AND NONLINEAR PEER EFFECTS ON ADOLESCENT VIOLENT CRIME*

Although evidence of the strong correlation between deviant behavior and exposure to deviant peers is overwhelming, researchers have yet to investigate whether a nonlinear functional form better captures this relationship than does a linear form. Researchers also have yet to examine the extent to which peer effects vary as a function of the neighborhood context. To address these issues, we use data from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) to examine 1) the functional form of the relationship between peer violence exposure and self‐reported violent crime and 2) the extent to which the effect of exposure to violent peers on violence is ecologically structured. Estimates from logistic hierarchical models indicate that the effect of peer violence exposure on violent crime decreases at higher values of peer violence, as reflected in a nonlinear relationship (expressed in terms of log‐odds). Furthermore, exposure to violent peers increases along with neighborhood disadvantage, and the effect of peer violence exposure on violent crime is attenuated as neighborhood disadvantage increases, which is reflected in a cross‐level peer violence/disadvantage interaction.     

Toward a multidimensional model for sexual recidivism risk

The paradigm underlying current sexual offender recidivism risk assessment procedures conceptualizes such risk in a linear fashion, ranging on a single continuum from 0% to 100%. Each risk and protective characteristic thought of relevance in an evaluation is used as an indicator of increased or decreased risk, respectively, along that same continuum. This conceptualization of risk was useful as a starting place for the application of empirically supported risk and protective factors. On the other hand, this perspective is likely simplistic and therefore potentially results in some errors that a more sophisticated assessment model would avoid. Recent research findings indicate support for a multidimensional model for sexual recidivism risk. This article explores what we already know about the existence of multiple risk dimensions, what those dimensions may be, and which risk factors assess which dimension. Implications for risk assessment procedures are discussed including how risk evaluations using this model might be conducted.     

University students’ support to penalty enhancement for hate crime

Laws enabling penalty enhancement for crimes motivated by hostility or prejudice, i.e. hate crimes, have become common in many countries. However, laws as a measure against hate crimes have been contested, because their deterrent effect has gained none or little support in the (limited) literature, and they may be considered symbolic rather than deterrent. This study investigates attitudes towards penalty enhancement for hate crimes. Previous empirical investigations of this question are scarce. The material consists of a survey targeting nearly 3000 Swedish university students. Support for penalty enhancement for hate crime was moderate, shown by one third of the total sample. Results supported the premise that students belonging to a minority group, assumed to be at risk of hate crime victimization, agree to a higher extent of penalty enhancement than students belonging to the majority. Previous victimization experiences and worrying about being victimized were not significantly related to punitive attitudes. However, respondents who perceived the risk of victimization to be increased for minority groups in general were more likely to support penalty enhancement for hate crime. Findings should be confirmed in a nationally representative sample since the public’s perspective on the criminal justice system is important for understanding and dealing with the social problem of hate crime.     

DISCERNING UNFAIRNESS WHERE OTHERS MAY NOT: LOW SELF-CONTROL AND UNFAIR SANCTION PERCEPTIONS

Criminologists have long recognized that whether one perceives a sanction as fair or unfair influences the deterrent success of sanctions and the legitimacy afforded to legal authority. Unfortunately, although several scholars have claimed that individual characteristics influence how sanctions are interpreted, very little research has explored the individual factors that influence how one perceives sanctions to be fair/unfair. In this study, we take Gottfredson and Hirschi's notion of self-control and use it to explain, in part, whether an individual perceives a sanction as fair/unfair. We also examine how sanction perceptions and low self-control influence the perceived anger that may result from being singled out for sanctioning and whether self-control conditions the relationship between perceptions and anger. Our results suggest that individuals with low self-control are more likely to perceive sanctions as unfair, that unfair sanctions and low self-control lead to perceived anger for being singled out for punishment and that self-control conditions the effect of unfair sanction perceptions on perceived anger. Future directions are outlined.     

For Whom Do Sanctions Deter and Label?

Deterrence and labeling theories make opposing predictions regarding the effect of sanctions on subsequent crime. Deterrence anticipates that sanctions deter, while labeling anticipates that sanctions amplify future crime. The knowledge base with respect to this question is vast, and while a handful of studies provide evidence of a deterrent effect, the majority of studies indicate a null effect. Our study examines whether an arrest leads to an increase in subsequent crime, but extends the knowledge base by considering whether an arrest has the same effect across offender trajectories and by employing techniques that deal with sample selection bias. Thus, we assess for whom sanctions deter or exacerbate subsequent offending. Results indicate that for greater risk youth, arrest amplifies subsequent delinquency, net of other effects, but not among lower risk youth. Thus, experiencing an arrest aggravates subsequent delinquency among some but not all persons. Implications and directions for future research are identified.     

Does Capital Punishment Have a Deterrent Effect? New Evidence from Postmoratorium Panel Data

Evidence on the deterrent effect of capital punishment is importantfor many states that are currently reconsidering their positionon the issue. We examine the deterrent hypothesis by using county-level,postmoratorium panel data and a system of simultaneous equations.The procedure we employ overcomes common aggregation problems,eliminates the bias arising from unobserved heterogeneity, andprovides evidence relevant for current conditions. Our resultssuggest that capital punishment has a strong deterrent effect;each execution results, on average, in eighteen fewer murders—witha margin of error of plus or minus ten. Tests show that resultsare not driven by tougher sentencing laws and are robust tomany alternative specifications.     

A NOTE ON PERCEPTUAL DETERRENCE,RELIGIOUSLY BASED MORAL CONDEMNATION,AND SOCIAL CONTROL*

Empirical investigations of social control mechanisms are often limited to single sources of control, such as the efficacy of legal punishments. Because research has produced only moderate support for the hypothesis that perceived risk of legal punishments reduces the likelihood of nonconformity, some have searched sources of control that condition this relationship. such as the degree of moral condemnation individuals hold toward a criminal/delinquent act. However, relevant research has resulted in contradictory findings. Using cross-sectional and panel data, we obtained results that show that moral condemnation of an act conditions the deterrent relationship and that findings from previous studies may have underestimated the effect of legal deterrents given the presence of those in the population who refrain from marijuana use because it is believed to be sin fur. Implications of the findings for the relative deterrability of serious versus minor offenses and the relevance of this distinction for issues of social control are discussed.     

THE EFFECT OF IMPRISONMENT ON RECIDIVISM RATES OF FELONY OFFENDERS: A FOCUS ON DRUG OFFENDERS*

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the deterrent effect of imprisonment. Using data on offenders convicted of felonies in 1993 in Jackson County (Kansas City), Missouri, we compare recidivism rates for offenders sentenced to prison with those for offenders placed on probation. We find no evidence that imprisonment reduces the likelihood of recidivism. Instead, we find compelling evidence that offenders who are sentenced to prison have higher rates of recidivism and recidivate more quickly than do offenders placed on probation. We also find persuasive evidence that imprisonment has a more pronounced criminogenic effect on drug offenders than on other types of offenders.     

THE IMPACT OF MEGAN'S LAW ON SEX OFFENDER RECIDIVISM: THE MINNESOTA EXPERIENCE*

Although Megan's Law was passed more than 10 years ago, very little is known as to whether it reduces sex offender recidivism significantly. Using a retrospective quasi‐experimental design, we examine whether community notification has a deterrent effect by comparing the recidivism rates of 155 level 3 (“high public risk”) sex offenders released from Minnesota prisons between 1997 and 2002 who were subject to broad notification with two separate control groups who were not. The first control group (referred to as the prenotification group) contained 125 sex offenders released between 1990 and 1996 (the 7 years preceding the implementation of the Community Notification Act) who likely would have been subject to broad community notification had the law been in effect at the time of their release. The second control group (referred to as the non‐notification group) was composed of 155 offenders (37 level 1 and 118 level 2) released between 1997 and 2002 who were not subject to broad community notification. The results from the Cox proportional hazards models reveal that broad community notification significantly reduced the risk of time to a sex reoffense (rearrest, reconviction, and reincarceration) compared with both control groups. The findings were mixed, however, for both non‐sex and general reoffending. Whereas broad community notification significantly reduced the risk of timing to both non‐sex and general recidivism compared with the prenotification group, no such effects were found in the non‐notification group analyses. We discuss the implications of these results and attempt to explain why Megan's Law seems to reduce sex offense recidivism in Minnesota.     

Toward the development of punishment equivalencies: Male and female inmates rate the severity of alternative sanctions compared to prison

According to a survey of 415 male and female inmates serving brief prison terms for nonviolent offenses, inmates perceive several alternative sanctions as significantly more punitive than imprisonment. Women rate alternatives as less punitive than do men, and are more amenable to participating in them. We find that prison and probation do not necessarily define the high and low extremes along a continuum of sanction severity, and we show for the first time how female inmates rank the punitiveness of criminal sanctions. Findings bear on the eventual development of meaningful punishment equivalencies and a valid continuum of criminal sanctions while raising doubts about the value of brief prison terms as a specific deterrent to crime. Our results also support consideration of gender differences in punishment and deterrence. We critique the problems associated with research on offenders' perceptions of the severity of sanctions, and discuss implications for deterrence theory and corrections policy.     

GENERAL DETERRENCE THROUGH CIVILIAN GUN OWNERSHIP: AN EVALUATION OF THE QUASI-EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE*

It has often been argued that civilian firearm ownership acts as a deterrent to crime. Much of the support for this claim is based on incidents that have called attention to the prevalence of privately owned guns. We examined several such incidents and failed to and persuasive evidence of a deterrent effect.