Can criminology sway the public? How empirical findings about deterrence affect public punishment preferences.

IF 3.1 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Crime Science Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-18 DOI:10.1186/s40163-024-00240-8
Brendan Rose, Malouke Esra Kuiper, Chris Reinders Folmer, Benjamin van Rooij
{"title":"Can criminology sway the public? How empirical findings about deterrence affect public punishment preferences.","authors":"Brendan Rose, Malouke Esra Kuiper, Chris Reinders Folmer, Benjamin van Rooij","doi":"10.1186/s40163-024-00240-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background setting: </strong>Punitive approaches to deter offending remain popular despite limited evidence of their effectiveness. This study investigated what effect presenting empirical criminological findings about the effectiveness of deterrence to a general public has on their punishment preferences. It builds on earlier research showing that such presentation reduces the public's inclination towards strict punishment. The present study extended this research by exploring whether the impact of scientific evidence on public punishment preferences is affected by crime severity and by exploring cognitive and psychological factors that may underpin this relationship.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using a vignette study paradigm, a general public sample of 330 participants were asked to make hypothetical punishment decisions to reduce crime (whether or not to double sentences) for one of three crime types that varied in severity. For each crime type, half of participants were additionally provided with a summary of research on the deterrent effect of punitive policy measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Presenting scientific evidence reduced participants' preferences for stronger punishment and that this effect remained consistent regardless of crime severity-ranging from burglary to homicide. In addition, we did not find evidence that difference in individuals' cognitive style, negative emotional reactions, perceptions about seriousness, or beliefs about redeemability moderated or mediated this relationship.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study provides compelling findings that further clarify the circumstances required for scientific evidence to be successfully disseminated to a general public to bring their punishment preferences more in line with the state of empirical science.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40163-024-00240-8.</p>","PeriodicalId":37844,"journal":{"name":"Crime Science","volume":"13 1","pages":"43"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11655585/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Crime Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40163-024-00240-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background setting: Punitive approaches to deter offending remain popular despite limited evidence of their effectiveness. This study investigated what effect presenting empirical criminological findings about the effectiveness of deterrence to a general public has on their punishment preferences. It builds on earlier research showing that such presentation reduces the public's inclination towards strict punishment. The present study extended this research by exploring whether the impact of scientific evidence on public punishment preferences is affected by crime severity and by exploring cognitive and psychological factors that may underpin this relationship.

Methods: Using a vignette study paradigm, a general public sample of 330 participants were asked to make hypothetical punishment decisions to reduce crime (whether or not to double sentences) for one of three crime types that varied in severity. For each crime type, half of participants were additionally provided with a summary of research on the deterrent effect of punitive policy measures.

Results: Presenting scientific evidence reduced participants' preferences for stronger punishment and that this effect remained consistent regardless of crime severity-ranging from burglary to homicide. In addition, we did not find evidence that difference in individuals' cognitive style, negative emotional reactions, perceptions about seriousness, or beliefs about redeemability moderated or mediated this relationship.

Conclusions: This study provides compelling findings that further clarify the circumstances required for scientific evidence to be successfully disseminated to a general public to bring their punishment preferences more in line with the state of empirical science.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40163-024-00240-8.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
犯罪学能影响公众吗?威慑的实证研究结果如何影响公众的惩罚偏好。
背景背景:惩罚犯罪的方法仍然很流行,尽管其有效性证据有限。本研究探讨了向公众展示威慑有效性的实证犯罪学发现对其惩罚偏好的影响。它建立在早期研究的基础上,该研究表明,这种表现会降低公众对严厉惩罚的倾向。本研究通过探索科学证据对公共惩罚偏好的影响是否受到犯罪严重程度的影响,以及探索可能支撑这种关系的认知和心理因素,扩展了这一研究。方法:采用小插图研究范式,要求330名普通公众样本对三种不同严重程度的犯罪类型中的一种做出假设的惩罚决定,以减少犯罪(是否双重判决)。对于每一种犯罪类型,有一半的参与者额外获得了关于惩罚性政策措施威慑作用的研究摘要。结果:提供科学证据降低了参与者对更严厉惩罚的偏好,并且无论犯罪的严重程度如何——从入室盗窃到杀人——这种影响都是一致的。此外,我们没有发现证据表明个体的认知风格、消极情绪反应、对严谨性的看法或对可救赎性的信念的差异会调节或调解这种关系。结论:本研究提供了令人信服的发现,进一步澄清了科学证据成功传播给公众以使他们的惩罚偏好更符合经验科学状态所需的情况。补充信息:在线版本包含补充资料,下载地址为10.1186/s40163-024-00240-8。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Crime Science
Crime Science Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
11.90
自引率
8.20%
发文量
12
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Crime Science is an international, interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal with an applied focus. The journal''s main focus is on research articles and systematic reviews that reflect the growing cooperation among a variety of fields, including environmental criminology, economics, engineering, geography, public health, psychology, statistics and urban planning, on improving the detection, prevention and understanding of crime and disorder. Crime Science will publish theoretical articles that are relevant to the field, for example, approaches that integrate theories from different disciplines. The goal of the journal is to broaden the scientific base for the understanding, analysis and control of crime and disorder. It is aimed at researchers, practitioners and policy-makers with an interest in crime reduction. It will also publish short contributions on timely topics including crime patterns, technological advances for detection and prevention, and analytical techniques, and on the crime reduction applications of research from a wide range of fields. Crime Science publishes research articles, systematic reviews, short contributions and theoretical articles. While Crime Science uses the APA reference style, the journal welcomes submissions using alternative reference styles on a case-by-case basis.
期刊最新文献
Exploring the usefulness of the INLA model in predicting levels of crime in the City of Johannesburg, South Africa Rapid assessment of human–elephant conflict: a crime science approach The heterogeneous effects of COVID-19 lockdowns on crime across the world Understanding the role of mobility in the recorded levels of violent crimes during COVID-19 pandemic: a case study of Tamil Nadu, India Shootings across the rural–urban continuum
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1