A deterrence study of the death penalty in Illinois, 1933–1980

The study analyzes the effect of executions and the death penalty on homicides in Illinois. A forty-eight year time series (1933–1980 inclusive) is used as the basis for this analysis. The first series of results are presented in a graph of executions and homicides by year. A second portion of the analysis compares the mean homicide rates for three time periods—years with executions, years when the death penalty was allowed but no executions were performed, and years in which the death penalty was abolished by the U.S. Supreme Court. No notable differences in homicide rates were observed for these three eras. Finally, a regression analysis was performed which included a lag structure and several relevant controls. The deterrence measure (executions) made no contribution to the variation in homicide rates. Thus, the authors conclude that there is no deterrent effect for the death penalty on homicides in Illinois.     

FELONY MURDER AND CAPITAL PUNISHMENT: AN EXAMINATION OF THE DETERRENCE QUESTION

A proper test of the deterrent effect of the death penalty must consider capital homicides. However, the criterion variable in most investigations has been total homicides—most of which bear no legal or theoretical relationship to capital punishment. To address this fundamental data problem, this investigation used Federal Bureau of Investigation data for 1976–1987 to examine the relationship between capital punishment and felony murder, the most common type of capital homicide. We conducted time series analyses of monthly felony murder rates, the frequency of executions, and the amount and type of television coverage of executions over the period. The analyses revealed occasional departures (for vehicle theft and narcotics killings) from the null hypotheses. However, on balance, and in line with the vast majority of capital punishment studies, this investigation found no consistent evidence that executions and the television coverage they receive are associated significantly with rates for total, index, or different types of felony murder.     

Beating a dead horse: Is there any basic empirical evidence for the deterrent effect of imprisonment?

Crime has declined over the past several years, renewing the belief that punishments such as imprisonment are useful mechanisms for deterring criminal activity. This article assesses this claim by examining data on U.S. crime and imprisonment trends from 1972 through 1993, a period that saw a continuous increase in levels of incarceration. This period was purposefully chosen because it represents a “natural” experiment concerning the impact of continuous increases in the rate of incarceration on crime rates. A second analysis examining cross-sectional, state level data for the period 1980-1991 is also presented. The findings from these analyses indicate that sentiments concerning the deterrent effect of imprisonment are overstated, and there appears to be no statistically significant relationship between imprisonment rates and crime rates for the period and areas under study. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

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.     

Some further evidence on imprisonment vs. the death penalty as a deterrent to murder

Law and Human Behavior - The research reported here extends an earlier investigation (Bailey, 1977) on the deterrent effect of imprisonment versus the death penalty for murder. As a result of some...     

The deterrent effect of executions: A meta-analysis thirty years after Ehrlich

In 1975, Ehrlich published a seminal paper in American Economic Review which argued that executions prevent murders in America. Subsequent empirical studies varied in their methodology and the time-period/region/country covered, and therefore it is difficult to draw a clear conclusion about the deterrent effect of executions. This article applies a meta-analysis to combine the results from refereed studies in order to summarize objectively the findings. The overall results of the meta-analysis supported the deterrent effect of executions, but the evidence for a deterrent effect depended on the type of study carried out (time-series and panel data versus cross-sectional data and the effects of publicity).     

Execution publicity and homicide in Georgia

A requisite of both general deterrence and brutalization theories of capital punishment is citizen awareness of executions. Yet this dimension is frequently left unmeasured in the literature on executions and homicide. Further, the current literature utilizes nationwide data, which introduces aggregation bias. The present study deals with these issues, testing the brutalization theory with data on publicized executions in the state of Georgia. Monthly data are used in order to capture any short-term brutalization effect. The results of a multivariate time-series model find that a publicized execution is associated with an increase of 2.6 homicides, or 6.8%, in the month of the publicized execution. Publicized executions were associated with an increase of 55 homicides during the time period analyzed. The results provide no support for the deterrence, victim mobilization, and normative validation perspectives on homicide. The findings can be interpreted, however, from several different varieties of brutalization theory.     

Does the death penalty save lives?

Research Summary Economists have recently reexamined the “capital punishment deters homicide” thesis using modern econometric methods, with most studies reporting robust deterrent effects. The current study revisits this controversial question using annual state panel data from 1977 to 2006. Employing well‐known econometric procedures for panel data analysis, our results provide no empirical support for the argument that the existence or application of the death penalty deters prospective offenders from committing homicide. Policy Implications Although policymakers and the public can continue to base support for use of the death penalty on retribution, religion, or other justifications, defending its use based solely on its deterrent effect is contrary to the evidence presented here. At a minimum, policymakers should refrain from justifying its use by claiming that it is a deterrent to homicide and should consider less costly, more effective ways of addressing crime.     

THE IMPACT OF OUT-OF-STATE PRISON POPULATION ON STATE HOMICIDE RATES: DISPLACEMENT AND FREE-RIDER EFFECTS*

Past studies of the impact of prison population on homicide rates have produced widely divergent results. Those using state-level data find small impacts, but those using national data find very large ones. We use displacement/free-rider theory to explore the difference between these results. Displacement, in the current context, refers to a criminal's movement away from states with higher imprisonment rates. Free riding occurs when a state benefits from criminals being incarcerated in other states. If the displacement effect holds, a state's prison population has a stronger impact on crime within the state than would be accomplished by deterrence and incapacitation alone. If the free-rider effect holds, higher prison populations outside the state reduce homicide in the state because criminals are incapacitated elsewhere. Using vital statistics data for 1929 to 1992, we conduct separate homicide regressions for each state using both in-state and out-of-state prison population as independent variables. We find that the out-of-state variable has a much larger (negative) association with homicide, indicating substantial free riding. We also find evidence of a small displacement impact.     

THE SHORT‐TERM EFFECTS OF EXECUTIONS ON HOMICIDES: DETERRENCE,DISPLACEMENT, OR BOTH?*

Does the death penalty save lives? In recent years, a new round of research has been using annual time‐series panel data from the 50 U.S. states for 25 or so years from the 1970s to the late 1990s that claims to find many lives saved through reductions in subsequent homicide rates after executions. This research, in turn, has produced a round of critiques, which concludes that these findings are not robust enough to model even small changes in specifications that yield dramatically different results. A principal reason for this sensitivity of the findings is that few state‐years exist (about 1 percent of all state‐years) in which six or more executions have occurred. To provide a different perspective, we focus on Texas, a state that has used the death penalty with sufficient frequency to make possible relatively stable estimates of the homicide response to executions. In addition, we narrow the observation intervals for recording executions and homicides from the annual calendar year to monthly intervals. Based on time‐series analyses and independent‐validation tests, our best‐fitting model shows that, from January 1994 through December 2005, evidence exists of modest, short‐term reductions in homicides in Texas in the first and fourth months that follow an execution—about 2.5 fewer homicides total. Another model suggests, however, that in addition to homicide reductions, some displacement of homicides may be possible from one month to another in the months after an execution, which reduces the total reduction in homicides after an execution to about .5 during a 12‐month period. Implications for additional research and the need for future analysis and replication are discussed.     

Is Deterrence Effective? Results of a Meta-Analysis of Punishment

It is supposed that threats of punishment deter potential criminals from committing crimes. The correctness of this theory is, however, questionable. Numerous empirical investigations have come to different results. In this article a meta-analysis is described which tries to find out the reasons for the different findings. First evaluations indicate that the methods of research have an influence on the results and that a possible deterring effect of the penal law can only be covered reasonably with a very differentiating model. Not all criminal acts can be influenced by deterrence. It appears that the most significant deterrent effects can be achieved in cases of minor crime, administrative offences and infringements of informal social norms. In cases of homicide, on the other hand, the meta-analysis does not indicate that the death penalty has a deterrent effect. According to the results, the validity of the deterrence hypothesis must be looked at in a differenciated manner.     

Exploring the Positive Punishment Effect Among Incarcerated Adult Offenders

The vast majority of offenders released from prison will re-offend, about two-thirds will be re-arrested with three years, most current prison inmates have prior prison experience, and many repeat offenders are devoted to what has been termed a criminal lifestyle. Findings from a survey of over 700 incarcerated adult offenders explore the effect of different measures of past punishment on inmates’ perceptions of the certainty and severity of future sanctions, and self-reported likelihood of re-offending after release. Results are mixed, with measures of current imprisonment being associated with a deterrent effect, while measures of past imprisonment (juvenile and adult) and experience with alternative sanctions being associated with a criminogenic effect. Recognizing that the data are not longitudinal and contain no measures of actual re-offending, the implied positive punishment effect is explained by applying social learning dynamics and insights from ethnographic studies. Specifically, a) non-social reinforcers-particularly affective costs and benefits experienced through offending, b) association with criminal reference groups in and out of prison, and c) a lack of legitimate, reintegrative opportunities upon reentry all serve to promote re-offending. Findings have implications for the study of offender decision-making processes, and speak to the efficacy of imprisonment as a deterrent to crime.     

Deterrence and the Death Penalty: Partial Identification Analysis Using Repeated Cross Sections

Objectives

Researchers have used repeated cross sectional observations of homicide rates and sanctions to examine the deterrent effect of the adoption and implementation of death penalty statutes. The empirical literature, however, has failed to achieve consensus. A fundamental problem is that the outcomes of counterfactual policies are not observable. Hence, the data alone cannot identify the deterrent effect of capital punishment. This paper asks how research should proceed. We seek to make transparent how assumptions shape inference.

Methods

We study the identifying power of relatively weak assumptions restricting variation in treatment response across places and time. We perform empirical analysis using state-level data in the United States in 1975 and 1977.

Results

The results are findings of partial identification that bound the deterrent effect of capital punishment. Under the weakest restrictions, there is substantial ambiguity: we cannot rule out the possibility that having a death penalty statute substantially increases or decreases homicide. This ambiguity is reduced when we impose stronger assumptions, but inferences are sensitive to the maintained restrictions.

Conclusions

Imposing certain assumptions implies that adoption of a death penalty statute increases homicide, but other assumptions imply that the death penalty deters it. Thus, society at large can draw strong conclusions only if there is a consensus favoring particular assumptions. Without such a consensus, data on sanctions and murder rates cannot settle the debate about deterrence. However, data combined with weak assumptions can bound and focus the debate.     

Armed Americans: The impact of firearm availability on national homicide rates

This study examines the relationship between firearm availability and national homicide rates. The theoretical and empirical literatures are reviewed, and a cross-national two-stage least squares regression analysis is described. The relationship between a circa 1990 measure of firearm availability and the average 1990–1994 homicide rate is examined across 36 countries. Two-stage least squares regression, which controls for homicide's effect on firearm availability in addition to a number of other confounding factors, reveals a statistically significant positive effect of firearm availability on national homicide rates. The magnitude of the association is considerable. The observed relationship is found to be insensitive to sample composition. Results also indicate that homicide rates do not influence levels of firearm availability. The limitations of the study and avenues for future research are discussed.     

DETERRENCE, BRUTALIZATION, AND THE DEATH PENALTY: ANOTHER EXAMINATION OF OKLAHOMA'S RETURN TO CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

A replication and extension of a weekly ARZMA analysis (1989–1991) by Cochran et al. (1994), which appeared in Criminology, confirms that Oklahoma's return to capital punishment in 1990, after a 25-year moratorium, was followed by a significant increase in killings involving strangers. Moreover, a multivariate autoregressive analysis, which includes measures of the frequency of executions, the level of print media attention devoted to executions, and selected sociodemographic variables, produced results consistent with the brutalization hypothesis for total homicides, as well as a variety of different types of killing involving both strangers and nonstrangers. No prior study has shown such strong support for the capital punishment and brutalization argument. However, there is also a suggestion of a possible lagged deterrent effect for the level of media coverage of executions for nonfelony murders involving strangers. The analysis indicates that the impact of capital punishment in Oklahoma during the 1989–1991 period was much more extensive than suggested by the earlier study. Recommendations are made for further research examining additional jurisdictions and time periods to determine the generalizability of the patterns found for Oklahoma.     

Canadian firearms legislation and effects on homicide 1974 to 2008

Canada has implemented legislation covering all firearms since 1977 and presents a model to examine incremental firearms control. The effect of legislation on homicide by firearm and the subcategory, spousal homicide, is controversial and has not been well studied to date. Legislative effects on homicide and spousal homicide were analyzed using data obtained from Statistics Canada from 1974 to 2008. Three statistical methods were applied to search for any associated effects of firearms legislation. Interrupted time series regression, ARIMA, and Joinpoint analysis were performed. Neither were any significant beneficial associations between firearms legislation and homicide or spousal homicide rates found after the passage of three Acts by the Canadian Parliament--Bill C-51 (1977), C-17 (1991), and C-68 (1995)--nor were effects found after the implementation of licensing in 2001 and the registration of rifles and shotguns in 2003. After the passage of C-68, a decrease in the rate of the decline of homicide by firearm was found by interrupted regression. Joinpoint analysis also found an increasing trend in homicide by firearm rate post the enactment of the licensing portion of C-68. Other factors found to be associated with homicide rates were median age, unemployment, immigration rates, percentage of population in low-income bracket, Gini index of income equality, population per police officer, and incarceration rate. This study failed to demonstrate a beneficial association between legislation and firearm homicide rates between 1974 and 2008.     

DETERRENCE OR BRUTALIZATION? AN IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF OKLAHOMA'S RETURN TO CAPITAL PUNISHMENT*

On September 10, 1990 Charles Troy Coleman was put to death by lethal injection at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary. Coleman's execution was the first in the state in more than 25 years, generating significant media coverage and providing a unique opportunity to assess the impact of the state's return to executing capital offenders. Interrupted time-series analyses are performed with weekly data from the UCR Supplemental Homicide Reports for the state for the period January 1989 through December 1991. Analyses are performed for the total level of criminal homicides and homicides disaggregated into two types of murder–felony murder and stranger homicides–testing hypotheses that predict opposing impacts for each type of homicide. As predicted, no evidence of a deterrent or a brutalization effect is found for criminal homicides in general. Similarly, the predicted deterrent effect of the execution on the level of felony murders is not observed. Evidence of the predicted brutalization effect on the level of stranger homicides is observed, however. Supplementary analyses on further offense disaggregations continue to support these initial findings and permit a more coherent interpretation of the results.     

Reassessing the Cross-National Relationship Between Income Inequality and Homicide Rates: Implications of Data Quality Control in the Measurement of Income Distribution

A significant positive relationship between income inequality and homicide rates has been found in a large number of cross-sectional studies and a few longitudinal analyses; a theoretically interesting interaction effect between income inequality and social welfare has also been found. For the most part researchers have been willing to use generous quality criteria in collecting income-distribution data, to maximize sample size and thereby enhance statistical power and representativeness. In the present paper we use a recently developed data set with explicit quality ratings for the income-distribution data, which permits systematic assessment of the consequences of relying on income-distribution measures of varying quality in examining the inequality-homicide relationship. Our analyses reveal that the income inequality-homicide relationship is remarkably robust in cross-sectional analyses. Regardless of the quality of income-distribution data, we observe significant positive effects of the Gini coefficient on homicide rates in cross-sectional multivariate models. Consistent results are also observed when an interaction term for income inequality and decommodification is examined. The results of longitudinal analyses differ; we observe a significant positive effect of changes in inequality on changes in homicide rates only when income-distribution measures of low quality are used.     

Why longer prison terms fail to serve a specific deterrent effect: an empirical assessment on the remembered severity of imprisonment

For a prison sentence to exert a specific deterrent effect, the ultimate question is that imprisonment is remembered as aversive once the offender is released, and is contemplating future criminal activities. Drawing on insights from social psychology and cognition, this study assessed (1) how inmates remember the severity of their imprisonment following release, and (2) how the severity as experienced while being incarcerated (e.g. the worst or the last moment) affects its recollected aversiveness among a sample of Dutch inmates who were released for approximately six months (n?=?696). The findings indicated that the severity as experienced while being incarcerated is strongly related to the severity as recollected following release, net of the duration of confinement. Strikingly, to the extent that the length of imprisonment affected its recollected aversiveness, it did so in the opposite direction than traditional deterrence research presumes. Implications for correctional policy and future research are discussed.     

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND LETHAL ASSAULTS AGAINST POLICE

This investigation provides a multivariate analysis of the deferrent effect of the death penalty on the rate of lethal assaults against the police. Examining statelevel data for the period 1961 to 1971, we hypothesize a significant inverse relationship between the rate of police killings and (1) the statutory provision for capital punishment and (2) the execution rate of convicted murderers. Contrary to the deferrence hypotheses, no support is found for the argument that the provision and use of the death penalty provides an added measure of protection for the police. Rather, variation in police killings rates, like the general homicide rate, would appear to be largely a function of various sociodemographic factors.