Stopping (or Slowing) the Revolving Door: Factors Related to NGRI Acquittees' Maintenance of a Conditional Release

The current study sought to extend the knowledge about factors associated with NGRI acquittees' maintenance of a conditional release after hospital discharge. The medical and forensic records of 125 NGRI acquittees were reviewed to collect a variety of demographic, clinical, criminal, and aftercare factors. A hierarchical survival analysis approach to determining success was compared to data analysis strategies typically employed in the area. Survival analysis, which accounts for both conditional release success status and time on conditional release, revealed that minority status, substance abuse diagnosis, and a prior criminal history were the factors that significantly predicted conditional release revocation. Treatment and policy implications of these results are discussed.     

Measuring Socio-economic Status in the Millennium Villages: The Role of Asset Index Choice

How are poverty analyses and poverty traps assessments affected by the choice among conventional methods of asset index construction? To address this question, this article uses panel data from four sites in the Millennium Villages Project (MVP) in Malawi, Tanzania, Mali and Ghana to study the relationship between eight asset indices and the sensitivity of findings related to poverty rates, poverty transitions and poverty traps to the index used. We find that although estimations of poverty rates and transitions are largely consistent across indices, evidence of poverty traps can be conditional on which asset index is used. The asset indices studied include structural income, principal components, factor analysis and a reduced set of assets reflecting the portfolio assessed in the Demographic Health Survey (DHS) data.     

Is Putin’s popularity real?

Vladimir Putin has managed to achieve strikingly high public approval ratings throughout his time as president and prime minister of Russia. But is his popularity real, or are respondents lying to pollsters? We conducted a series of list experiments in early 2015 to estimate support for Putin while allowing respondents to maintain ambiguity about whether they personally do so. Our estimates suggest support for Putin of approximately 80%, which is within 10 percentage points of that implied by direct questioning. We find little evidence that these estimates are positively biased due to the presence of floor effects. In contrast, our analysis of placebo experiments suggests that there may be a small negative bias due to artificial deflation. We conclude that Putin’s approval ratings largely reflect the attitudes of Russian citizens.     

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.     

Incentivizing Responses to Self-report Questions in Perceptual Deterrence Studies: An Investigation of the Validity of Deterrence Theory Using Bayesian Truth Serum

Objective

Criminological researchers want people to reveal considerable private information when utilizing self-report surveys, such as involvement in crime, subjective attitudes and expectations, and probability judgments. Some of this private information is easily accessible for subjects and all that is required is for individuals to be honest, while other information requires mental effort and cognitive reflection. Though researchers generally provide little or no incentive to be honest and thoughtful, it is generally assumed that subjects do provide honest and accurate information. We assess the accuracy of deterrence measures by employing a scoring rule known as the Bayesian truth serum (BTS)—that incentivizes honesty and thoughtfulness among respondents.

Method

Individuals are asked to report on self-report offending and estimates of risk after being assigned to one of two conditions: (1) a group where there is a financial incentive just for participation, and (2) a BTS financial incentive group where individuals are incentivized to be honest and thoughtful.

Results

We find evidence that there are some important differences in the responses to self-reporting offending items and estimates of the probability of getting arrested between the groups. Individuals in the BTS condition report a greater willingness to offend and lower estimates of perceived risk for drinking and driving and cheating on exams. Moreover, we find that the negative correlation between perceived risk and willingness to offend that is often observed in scenario-based deterrence research does not emerge in conditions where respondents are incentivized to be accurate and thoughtful in their survey responses.

Conclusion

The results raise some questions about the accuracy of survey responses in perceptual deterrence studies, and challenge the statistical relationship between perceived risk and offending behavior. We suggest further exploration within criminology of both BTS and other scoring rules and greater scrutiny of the validity of criminological data.