HOW THE U.S. PRISON BOOM HAS CHANGED THE AGE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PRISON POPULATION

This article provides a demographic exposition of the changes in the U.S prison population during the period of mass incarceration that began in the late twentieth century. By drawing on data from the Survey of Inmates in State Correctional Facilities (1974–2004) for inmates 17–72 years of age (N = 336), we show that the age distribution shifted upward dramatically: Only 16 percent of the state prison population was 40 years old or older in 1974; by 2004, this percentage had doubled to 33 percent with the median age of prisoners rising from 27 to 34 years old. By using an estimable function approach, we find that the change in the age distribution of the prison population is primarily a cohort effect that is driven by the “enhanced” penal careers of the cohorts who hit young adulthood—the prime age of both crime and incarceration—when substance use was at its peak. Period‐specific factors (e.g., proclivity for punishment and incidence of offense) do matter, but they seem to play out more across the life cycles of persons most affected in young adulthood (cohort effects) than across all age groups at one point in time (period effects).     

More than ten years after: The long-term stability of informed death penalty opinions

This panel study examined the stability of informed death penalty opinions more than ten years after students participated in a semester long death penalty class. Results for two “abstract” opinion measures indicated that support of the death penalty significantly diminished after exposure to the death penalty class, yet rebounded to initial pretest levels two to three years later. After more than ten years, the data revealed small increases in support of the death penalty from the first follow-up period. Personal involvement measures did not change significantly across the four points in time. The relative importance of four of the eleven reasons for death penalty support or opposition changed significantly over time. Those changes varied across measures. Some increased in importance over time, while others decreased in importance. Finally, race was a significant factor in every opinion measure, as well as in nine of the eleven reasons for death penalty support or opposition.     

The age of death: Appraising public opinion of juvenile capital punishment

Despite its original purpose to protect and rehabilitate wayward children, the juvenile system has grown more punitive and has embraced the use of harsher punishments, including execution, for juvenile offenders. Relatively little is known, however, about public attitudes toward the use of capital punishment for juveniles. This research explored the determinants of death penalty opinion, identified the minimum age at which respondents were willing to allow a juvenile to be put to death and examined the willingness of respondents to support an alternative sentence of life without the possibility of parole (LWOP). The results suggested that, while one-quarter of the sample was willing to execute juveniles who were fifteen and under at the time of the crime, there was less support for the execution of juveniles than of adults. In addition, of those who supported the use of the death penalty for juveniles, almost one-half would support LWOP as an alternative to the death penalty.     

Can information change public opinion? Another test of the Marshall hypotheses

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall offered his opinion regarding the utility of public opinion polls as a tool for assessing the “evolving standards of decency” regarding capital punishment. His arguments became known as the Marshall hypotheses and spawned a considerable body of empirical testing. The three Marshall hypotheses are: (1) support for capital punishment is inversely associated with knowledge about it, (2) exposure to information about capital punishment produces sentiments in opposition to capital punishment, but (3) exposure to information about capital punishment will have no impact on those who support it for retributive reasons. The results of previous tests of these hypotheses were somewhat mixed but supportive. None of these studies, however, examined the effects of change in knowledge levels with changes, if any, in death penalty attitudes and beliefs as needed for a more complete test of the Marshall hypotheses. The present study addressed this shortcoming. The results provided mixed support for these three hypotheses. That is, death penalty supporters were somewhat less informed than death penalty opponents; exposure to death penalty information and knowledge gains tended to be associated with attitudinal change in a directions suggested by these hypotheses; but, retributivists' attitudes toward and beliefs about capital punishment were not any more resistant to change than were the attitudes and beliefs of non-retributivists.     

Distrust of Government, the Vigilante Tradition, and Support for Capital Punishment

This study probes the interconnections among distrust of government, the historical context, and public support for the death penalty in the United States with survey data for area-identified samples of white and black respondents. Multilevel statistical analyses indicate contrary effects of government distrust on support for the death penalty for blacks and whites, fostering death penalty support among whites and diminishing it among blacks. In addition, we find that the presence of a "vigilante tradition," as indicated by a history of lynching, promotes death penalty support among whites but not blacks. Finally, contrary to Zimring's argument in The Contradictions of Capital Punishment , we find no evidence that vigilantism moderates the influence of government distrust on support for the death penalty, for either whites or blacks. Our analyses highlight the continuing influence of historical context as well as contemporary conditions in the formation of public attitudes toward criminal punishment, and they underscore the importance of attending to racial differences in the analysis of punitive attitudes.     

Reasons for South Korean attitudes towards the death penalty: exploring the nexus between strong public support and history of misapplication

As of this writing, South Korea (officially, the Republic of Korea) is an abolitionist-in-practice nation; capital punishment is legal, but no death sentences have been carried out since a moratorium was enacted in 1997. Public support for the death penalty has decreased over time; however, the factors that determine support for or opposition to the death penalty of the South Korean general public are largely unknown. Using survey data from a nationwide sample of 416 respondents, this study examined the potential predictors for public attitudes towards capital punishment support. A majority of survey respondents (83%) supported the death penalty, a higher percentage than recent surveys of the South Korean general public. The deterrence and retribution perspectives were positively related to death penalty support, while crime severity, neighbourhood safety, the brutalisation effect, and innocence were negatively related. This study provides the first multivariate analysis of factors associated with South Korean attitudes towards the death penalty.     

The nexus between attribution theory and racial attitudes: a test of racial attribution and public opinion of capital punishment

Research has shown that attribution theory and racial attitudes are among the most consistent attitudinal predictors of capital punishment opinion. This study explores the overlap of these two constructs, racial attribution, and its ability to account for support and opposition to the death penalty. Using data from the 1972–2016 cumulative data file of the General Social Survey, three logistic regression models were used to analyze the effect of internal and external racial attribution on capital punishment opinions for (a) the aggregate sample, (b) White respondents only, and (c) Black respondents only. Respondents were asked whether racial inequalities were due to structural disadvantages or personal deficiencies of Black Americans. Findings showed that respondents in all three models were more likely to support the death penalty when they attributed racial inequalities to personal deficiencies of Blacks and less likely to support the death penalty when they endorsed structural disadvantages, although the effects were somewhat muted for Black respondents. These findings suggest that ongoing public support for capital punishment in the United States is based at least in part on a fundamental attribution error in which Whites and some Blacks alike blame Blacks for their own deprivation.     

Public attitudes towards the death penalty

Responses to a general question regarding the use of the death penalty were compared with the sentences that respondents chose in a set of scenarios describing homicide cases. The percentage of respondents who assigned the death sentence in one or more of the following scenarios was higher than those who favored the death penalty in the abstract question, but there were inconsistencies in the answers. A majority assigned the death penalty only for the most heinous offender described, and the figures were lower for other crimes, even clear cases of first degree murder. At the same time, a manipulation involving information about methods of execution did not affect answers. These results strongly suggest that the abstract questions typically used in public opinion polls do not accurately reflect the public's feelings about use of the death penalty in specific cases. More generally, research on public opinion regarding criminal justice policies should survey a variety of specific circumstances.     

Confidence in the death penalty and support for its use: Exploring the value-expressive dimension of death penalty attitudes

Recent media and political attention has raised public awareness of a number of issues surrounding the death penalty. Questions regarding innocence, fair trials, and equitable access to counsel and the appellate process are ubiquitous in coverage of the death penalty. Adequate information about public attitudes toward the death penalty in light of these issues is currently lacking. In 2002, as part of the annual Texas Crime Poll, questions were asked about confidence in the administration of the death penalty, support for the death penalty, and support for a moratorium. The results indicate that, although a majority of respondents support the death penalty, a substantial proportion lack confidence in its use and support a moratorium on executions. Of those lacking confidence and those supporting a moratorium, strong majorities maintain support for the death penalty (68% and 73%, respectively). These findings suggest that death penalty attitudes may be largely value expressive.     

“Modern” death qualification

We report on the results of a comprehensive statewide survey of death penalty attitudes in which respondents were categorized in terms of their death-qualified or excludable status under several different Supreme Court doctrines governing the death-qualification process. We found that although changes in public opinion with respect to the death penalty in general have altered the relative sizes of the death-qualified and excludable groups, significant differences remain between them on a number of attitudinal dimensions, no matter which doctrines are employed to define these groups. We discuss the implications of these recent data, especially with respect to the Supreme Court's continued reference to the death-qualified jury as an index of community standards with respect to the death penalty itself.     

AN ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARD THE INSANITY DEFENSE*

Results from a public opinion survey of knowledge, attitudes, and support for the insanity defense indicate that people dislike the insanity defense for both retributive and utilitarian reasons: they want insane lawbreakers punished, and they believe that insanity defense procedures fail to protect the public. However, people vastly overestimate the use and success of the insanity plea. Several attitudinal and demographic variables that other researchers have found to be associated with people's support for the death penalty and perceptions of criminal sentencing are also related to support for the insanity defense. Implications for public policy are discussed.     

An Examination of Social-Psychological Factors and Support for the Death Penalty: Attribution, Moral Disengagement, and the Value-Expressive Function of Attitudes

This study examines the social-psychological factors of attributional styles, moral disengagement, and the value-expressive function of attitudes in relation to death penalty support and the robustness of that support. Respondents were first asked whether or not they supported the death penalty and were then presented several paragraphs of information exposing flaws or failures in the death penalty and asked how compelling they found the information and whether it impacted their death penalty attitudes. Results suggest that attributional style has little if any effect on death penalty support and that only a few aspects of moral disengagement seem to play a role. Value-expressiveness, on the other hand, appears to play a critical role in death penalty attitudes and support. Our findings suggest that when support is based on value-expressive foundations, it is more robust and unlikely to wane regardless of information or knowledge indicating problems with the death penalty.     

Kentuckian’s Attitudes on Capital Punishment, 1989–2016

Citizens’ attitudes toward the death penalty have been effected by the availability of life without parole (LWOP). Our analysis focuses upon data from a representative sample of Kentuckians on death penalty attitudes. The factors influencing and related to death penalty support and compared to support for LWOP are considered along with a review of Kentucky survey findings from 1989–2016. The results reveal consistent support for LWOP over the death penalty. Male Kentucky residents with a college education were most likely to support life without parole over capital punishment while male conservatives did not.     

Capital Punishment in the Era of Globalization: A Partial Test of the Marshall Hypothesis Among College Students

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall’s hypothesis—that knowledge about the death penalty would reduce support for it—has been measured in terms of the public’s receptivity to key arguments for abolition including racial discrimination, lack of deterrent effect, and innocence. The effect of the international contextual argument, however, has gone virtually untested, despite the argument’s increased popularity. This preliminary study examines the impact of the international contextual argument against the death penalty on the opinion of 216 adult American students at a public university in California. The results of this study suggest that student support for the death penalty was decreased by exposure to international contextual information. The research presented in this paper is intended to encourage further investigation into the possibility that American public opinion may be significantly affected by international context.     

Are self-identified Christian fundamentalists really more supportive of capital punishment? Exploring the relationship between fundamentalism and death penalty attitudes

Christian fundamentalism has often been linked to death penalty support, despite mixed results across more than a decade of empirical studies. More recently, a line of research has emerged that has called for a reconceptualization of fundamentalism as harsh and rigid, instead of being more a multifaceted concept. In the spirit of this call, we investigated the relative importance of Christian fundamentalism on death penalty attitudes when compared with non-religious social attitudes. Using 1,560 respondents from the 2008 General Social Survey data, we found self-identified Christian fundamentalism, though not biblical literalism or religious denomination, remained a significant predictor of death penalty attitudes when attitudes toward LGBT marriage equality were included in the model. Unexpectedly, white women who endorsed LGBT marriage equality were also more likely to support the death penalty. Based on our findings, we discuss implications and areas for future research.     

Over-simplification and error in public opinion surveys on capital punishment

Public opinion polls have shown a marked increase in support for capital punishment. Results of a recent poll, which resulted from collaboration between the author and Associated Press, further clarify published findings of public opinion polls and challenge the common wisdom that support for the death penalty is increasing. It was found that only 12 percent of those polled opposed the death penalty in all cases, that 57 percent advocated its use under some circumstances and that 27 percent supported the death penalty for all murder cases. These findings differ little from those reported by Louis Harris in 1973 (Bedau 1982).     

中美两国死刑制度之立法原因比较

中美两国尽管在文化传统、社会制度、经济发展水平等方面均存在较大差异,但在废止或严格限制死刑的世界性潮流面前,对死刑却采取了相似的政策——既保留死刑又限制其适用,其中既有民意因素,也有政治因素。美国现阶段的高犯罪率、南方的私刑传统、历史上未经纳粹统治等因素导致其支持死刑的民意高涨,这对于政治精英、联邦最高法院及地区法官和检察官都有影响;在中国,现阶段社会治安形势恶化、礼法传统与家族主义的深远影响,以及缺少西方启蒙运动洗礼等因素导致民意支持死刑,这对于执政党、立法机关和司法机关,以及法官与检察官个人,都产生了深刻的影响。在政治因素方面,美国联邦与各州的权限划分以及盛行的联邦主义是影响其现行死刑制度的重要原因;在中国,统治者所奉行的"乱世用重典"的治国之策和重刑主义的历史传统、特殊历史时期所形成的"左"的错误,都是影响中国死刑制度的重要原因。对于中美两国死刑制度进行改造,应注意从民意与政治因素方面着手进行。     

民意对死刑适用的影响辨析

民意虽然对死刑适用可能产生一定影响,但这种影响十分有限,影响死刑适用的主要案外因素是媒体和政治决策层的意志。要注意区分真实的民意和因受误导而产生的民意。应当将民意作为检视死刑适用的法律效果和社会效果的标准之一,认真、慎重地加以对待。     

The Death Penalty: A Multi-level Analysis of Public Opinion

Considerable research has examined public opinion of the death penalty using simplistic questions such as, “Do you favor or oppose the death penalty.” Simply categorizing people into favoring or opposing capital punishment does little to address the array of factors and circumstances that are part of every murder. We examine variables concerning the nature of homicides from a set of 40 murder vignettes used to gauge respondents’ level of support for capital punishment in murder cases. The data are structured such that vignette responses are nested within individuals, meaning a multi-level analysis is appropriate. We used HLM to explore how vignette-level or homicide related characteristics influence support for the death penalty, as well as how individual-level characteristics condition these factors. Analyses revealed that individual-level variables were non-significant when analyzed independently; however, cross-level interactions indicated significant individual-level influences on homicide-level characteristics as they relate to respondents’ support for the death penalty.     

Moving beyond Ford,Atkins, and Roper: jurors' attitudes toward the execution of the elderly and the physically disabled

Abstract

The central purpose of the current study is to correlate level of support for the death penalty, death-qualification status, attitudes toward the death penalty (ATDP), legal authoritarianism (RLAQ (Revised Legal Attitudes Questionnaire)), and demographic indices with attitudes toward the execution of the elderly and the physically disabled. Two hundred and fifty residents of the 12th Judicial Circuit in Florida completed a booklet that contained the following: (1) one question that measured their level of support for the death penalty; (2) one question that categorized their death-qualification status; (3) the ATDP; (4) the RLAQ; (5) 20 questions that measured participants' attitudes toward the execution of the elderly and the physically disabled (EEPD); and (6) standard demographic questions. Results indicated that level of support for the death penalty, death-qualification status, attitudes toward the death penalty, legal authoritarianism, and demographic indices were significantly related to four components of the EEPD. Legal implications and applications are discussed.