Applying Moral Foundations Theory to the Explanation of Capital Jurors’ Sentencing Decisions

Abstract

This study applies moral foundations theory to capital juror decision making. We hypothesized that binding moral foundations would predict death qualification and punitive sentencing decisions, whereas individualizing moral foundations would be associated with juror disqualification and a leniency effect. Additionally, we considered whether moral foundations can explain differences in death penalty application between conservatives and liberals. Respondents from two independent samples participated in a mock-juror task in which the circumstances of a hypothetical defendant’s case varied. Results revealed moral foundations were strong predictors of death qualification. The binding and individualizing foundations were related to sentencing decisions in the expected ways. Supporting our contention that moral foundations operate differently across different types of cases, heterogeneity in the effects of moral foundations was observed. Finally, we found support for the hypothesis that the relationship between sentencing decisions and conservatism would be attenuated by moral foundations.     

Pitfalls in state-authorized treatment of minors

Recently a federal court in Georgia ruled that several physicians and several state officials could be sued for state-authorized treatment of a minor over his father's objection. State authorization protects providers only if it is properly obtained and the authorizing official has the power to grant the authorization in the existing circumstances.     

Inner-city birth rates following enactment of the Minnesota parental notification law

An increase in birth rates to Minneapolis minors following the enactment of a parental notification law was examined. A well-publicized link between increasing birth rates and the law is shown to have been premature. Birth, abortion, and population data by age, race, and region suggest that the increasing birth rate in Minneapolis was not related to parental notification, but rather to a growing racial minority population.Preparation of this article was supported in part by an Aldeen Grant from Wheaton College. The authors wish to thank the Minnesota Center for Health Statistics, particularly James Wigginton and Carol Vargas, for their considerable work to provide birth, abortion, and population data in a form suitable for the current analysis. The authors also thank Americans United for Life for purchasing the data and providing them to the authors.     

Doctors under the knife

With Bill Clinton's new reforms only a month away, the health-care system is on the operating table--and the doctors are under the knife. Americans have a love-hate relationship with physicians: they like the care that doctors provide but hold them to blame for the nation's health-care mess. NEWSWEEK looks at how the culture of medicine may change, assesses doctors' fears--and examines the brave new world of HMOs.