Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Crime trend perceptions, negative emotions, and public punitiveness: a survey experiment of information treatment

  • Published:
Journal of Experimental Criminology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

Public punitiveness is closely related to the expansion of the US penal system. Prior studies have examined inaccurate crime trend perceptions and negative emotions as key predictors of punitive attitudes. However, the interconnections between crime trend perceptions, negative emotions, and punitive attitudes have not been explored. It is yet unknown if exposure to accurate crime trend information reduces negative emotions and public punitiveness.

Methods

I analyzed data from a survey-based experiment with a nationwide sample (N = 441) using conditional process analysis.

Results

Perceptions of rising crime trends were related to punitiveness both directly and indirectly through anger about crime. Exposure to accurate crime information did not alleviate anger about or fear of crime, but, surprisingly, increased support for punitive criminal justice policies.

Conclusions

The study highlights the importance of understanding the expressive and emotional elements of punishment and the possible positive effect of providing people with accurate crime information on punitiveness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. According to the standard definitions of American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR 2016), a survey is considered complete if the respondent answers crucial or essential questions. For this sample, a survey is considered complete if the respondent has answered questions on race and sex; otherwise, it is considered incomplete with a breakoff.

  2. In the general population, the median age is 38 years old; 29.92% of the population hold a college or advanced degree (US Census 2017). In the analytic sample, more than half (51.25%) of the respondents were under the age of 34; more than half (54.20%) of the respondents had a college or graduate degree.

  3. According to Pickett and Baker (2014), bidirectional questions may reduce biases associated with acquiescence responding to survey questions measuring punitiveness compared to unidirectional questions, although the alpha coefficient for the bidirectional question measure may be lower as the alpha coefficient for the unidirectional question measure is biased and inflated.

  4. The categorical demographic variables (i.e., Female, Nonwhite, Hispanic, Income, Education, and Political Conservatism) were treated as continuous variables in the analysis. The results remained the same when the demographic variables were treated as categorical variables in the models.

References

  • Ask, K., & Pina, A. (2011). On being angry and punitive: how anger alters perception of criminal intent. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(5), 494–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Association for Public Opinion Research (2016). Standard definitions report. Retrieved from www.aapor.org

  • Averill, J. R. (1983). Studies on anger and aggression: implications for theories of emotion. American Psychologist, 38(11), 1145–1160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckett, K. (1997). Making crime pay: law and order in contemporary American politics. Oxford: University. Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohm, R. M., & Vogel, B. L. (2004). More than ten years after: the long-term stability of informed death penalty opinions. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32(4), 307–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brace, P., & Boyea, B. D. (2008). State public opinion, the death penalty, and the practice of electing judges. American Journal of Political Science, 52(2), 360–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brame, R., Paternoster, R., Mazerolle, P., & Piquero, A. (1998). Testing for the equality of maximum-likelihood regression coefficients between two independent equations. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 14(3), 245–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brehm, S. S., & Brehm, J. W. (1981). Psychological reactance: a theory of freedom and control. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenan, M. (2017). Americans’ perceptions of local crime slightly improved. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx

  • Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: a new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T. (1969). Reforms as experiments. American Psychologist, 24(4), 409–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carvalho, H., & Chamberlen, A. (2018). Why punishment pleases: punitive feelings in a world of hostile solidarity. Punishment & Society, 20(2), 217–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiricos, T., Eschholz, S., & Gertz, M. (1997a). Crime, news and fear of crime: toward an identification of audience effects. Social Problems, 44(3), 342–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiricos, T., Hogan, M., & Gertz, M. (1997b). Racial composition of neighborhood and fear of crime. Criminology, 35(1), 107–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, H. J., Yu, M., & Sacco, P. (2018). Racial and ethnic differences in patterns of adolescent tobacco users: a latent class analysis. Children and Youth Services Review, 84, 86–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing public opinion in competitive democracies. American Political Science Review, 101(4), 637–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, F. T., & Gilbert, K. E. (1982). Reaffirming rehabilitation. Cincinnati: Anderson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, F. T., Clark, G. A., Cullen, J. B., & Mathers, R. A. (1985). Attribution, salience, and attitudes toward criminal sanctioning. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 12(3), 305–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denver, M., Pickett, J. T., & Bushway, S. D. (2018). Criminal records and employment: a survey of experiences and attitudes in the United States. Justice Quarterly, 35(4), 584–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ditton, J., Bannister, J., Gilchrist, E., & Farrall, S. (1999). Afraid or angry? Recalibrating the “fear” of crime. International Review of Victimology, 6(2), 83–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doob, A., & Roberts, J. V. (1982). Crime and official response to crime: the views of the Canadian public. Ottawa: Department of Justice Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowler, K. (2003). Media consumption and public attitudes toward crime and justice: the relationship between fear of crime, punitive attitudes, and perceived police effectiveness. Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, 10(2), 109–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellsworth, P. C., & Dougherty, A. (2016). Appraisals and reappraisals in the courtroom. Emotion Review, 8(1), 20–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellsworth, P. C., & Scherer, K. R. (2003). Appraisal processes in emotion. In R. Davidson, H. Goldsmith, & K. R. Scherer (Eds.), Handbook of affective sciences (pp. 572–595). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enns, P. K. (2016). Incarceration nation: how the United States became the most punitive democracy in the world. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Enns, P. K., & Ramirez, M. D. (2018). Privatizing punishment: testing theories of public support for private prison and immigration detention facilities. Criminology, 56(3), 546–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) (2017) Crime in the United State. Retrieved from https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s

  • Ferraro, K. F. (1995). Measuring risk and fear of crime. In K. F. Ferraro (Ed.), Fear of crime: interpreting victimization risk (pp. 21–39). Albany: State University of New York Press.

  • Fiedler, K., Schott, M., & Meiser, T. (2011). What mediation analysis can (not) do. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(6), 1231–1236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freiberg, A. (2001). Affective versus effective justice: instrumentalism and emotionalism in criminal justice. Punishment & Society, 3(2), 265–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge University Press.

  • Fox, B. H., & Farrington, D. P. (2012). Creating burglary profiles using latent class analysis: a new approach to offender profiling. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 39(12), 1582–1611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garland, D. (2001). The culture of control. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gault, B. A., & Sabini, J. (2000). The roles of empathy, anger, and gender in predicting attitudes toward punitive, reparative, and preventative public policies. Cognition & Emotion, 14(4), 495–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, A. (2017). The effect of message frames on public attitudes toward criminal justice reform for nonviolent offenses. Crime & Delinquency, 63(5), 636–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., Weiner, B., & Zucker, G. S. (1997). An attributional analysis of punishment goals and public reactions to OJ Simpson. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(4), 331–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: a regression-based approach. New York: Guilford publications.

  • Hartnagel, T. F., & Templeton, L. J. (2012). Emotions about crime and attitudes to punishment. Punishment & Society, 14(4), 452–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogan, M. J., Chiricos, T., & Gertz, M. (2005). Economic insecurity, blame, and punitive attitudes. Justice Quarterly, 22(3), 392–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hough, M., & Park, A. (2002). How malleable are attitudes to crime and punishment? Findings from a British deliberative poll. In Roberts, J. V. & Hough, M. (Eds.), Changing attitudes to punishment: public opinion, crime and justice (pp. 163–183). Cullompton, Devon: Willan.

  • Indermaur, D. (1987). Public perceptions of sentencing in Perth, Western Australia. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 20, 163–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Indermaur, D., Roberts, L., Spiranovic, C., Mackenzie, G., & Gelb, K. (2012). A matter of judgement: the effect of information and deliberation on public attitudes to punishment. Punishment & Society, 14(2), 147–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, W., Farrall, S., Gray, E., & Hay, C. (2017). Penal populism and the public thermostat: crime, public punitiveness, and public policy. Governance, 30, 463–481.

  • Johnson, D. (2009). Anger about crime and support for punitive criminal justice policies. Punishment & Society, 11(1), 51–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaebel, D., & Cowhig, M. (2018). Correctional populations in the United States, 2016. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirk, D. S., & Wakefield, S. (2018). Collateral consequences of punishment: a critical review and path forward. Annual Review of Criminology, 1, 171–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleck, G., & Jackson, D. B. (2016). Does crime cause punitiveness? Crime & Delinquency, 63(12), 1572–1599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A., & Maruna, S. (2009). Is a conservative just a liberal who has been mugged? Exploring the origins of punitive views. Punishment & Society, 11(2), 147–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kort-Butler, L. A., & Hartshorn, K. J. S. (2011). Watching the detectives: crime programming, fear of crime, and attitudes about the criminal justice system. The Sociological Quarterly, 52(1), 36–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kort-Butler, L. A., & Ray, C. M. (2019). Public support for the death penalty in a red state: the distrustful, the angry, and the unsure. Punishment & Society, 21(4), 473–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanza, S. T., & Rhoades, B. L. (2013). Latent class analysis: an alternative perspective on subgroup analysis in prevention and treatment. Prevention Science, 14(2), 157–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, J. S., Goldberg, J. H., & Tetlock, P. E. (1998). Sober second thought: the effects of accountability, anger, and authoritarianism on attributions of responsibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(6), 563–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leverentz, A. (2011). Neighborhood context of attitudes toward crime and reentry. Punishment & Society, 13(1), 64–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K., & Cook, J. (2017). Beyond misinformation: understanding and coping with the “post-truth” era. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(4), 353–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K., Seifert, C. M., Schwarz, N., & Cook, J. (2012). Misinformation and its correction: continued influence and successful debiasing. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13(3), 106–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: the effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(11), 2098–2109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marinos, V. (2005). Thinking about penal equivalents. Punishment & Society, 7(4), 441–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCorkle, R. C. (1993). Research note: punish and rehabilitate? Public attitudes toward six common crimes. Crime & Delinquency, 39(2), 240–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, L. L. (2013). Power to the people: violent victimization, inequality and democratic politics. Theoretical Criminology, 17(3), 283–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mooney, C. Z., & Lee, M. H. (2000). The influence of values on consensus and contentious morality policy: US death penalty reform, 1956-82. The Journal of Politics, 62(1), 223–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, R. E., & Kena, G. (2016). Criminal victimization, 2016 (Bulletin). Retrieved from https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv16.pdf

  • Mullinix, K. J., Leeper, T. J., Druckman, J. N., & Freese, J. (2015). The generalizability of survey experiments. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 2(2), 109–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson-Crotty, S., Peterson, D. A., & Ramirez, M. D. (2009). Dynamic representation (s): federal criminal justice policy and an alternative dimension of public mood. Political Behavior, 31(4), 629–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Conner, M. E. (1978). A community’s opinion on crime: some preliminary findings. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, 14, 61–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peffley, M., & Hurwitz, J. (2007). Persuasion and resistance: race and the death penalty in America. American Journal of Political Science, 51(4), 996–1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1992). Explaining the evidence: tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(2), 189–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickett, J. T., Chiricos, T., & Gertz, M. (2014). The racial foundations of Whites’ support for child saving. Social Science Research, 44, 44–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickett, J. T., & Baker, T. (2014). The pragmatic American: empirical reality or methodological artifact? Criminology, 52(2), 195–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickett, J. T., Roche, S. P., & Pogarsky, G. (2018). Toward a bifurcated theory of emotional deterrence. Criminology, 56(1), 27–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pogarsky, G., Roche, S. P., & Pickett, J. T. (2017). Heuristics and biases, rational choice, and sanction perceptions. Criminology, 55(1), 85–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez, M. D. (2013). Americans’ changing views on crime and punishment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 77(4), 1006–1031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J., Hough, M., Jackson, J., & Gerber, M. M. (2012). Public opinion towards the lay magistracy and the sentencing council guidelines: the effects of information on attitudes. British Journal of Criminology, 52(6), 1072–1091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. V., & Stalans, L. J. (1997). Public opinion, crime, and criminal justice. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. V., Stalans, L. J., Indermaur, D., & Hough, M. (2002). Penal populism and public opinion: lessons from five countries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Roche, S. P., Pickett, J. T., & Gertz, M. (2016). The scary world of online news? Internet news exposure and public attitudes toward crime and justice. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 32(2), 215–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shank, D. B. (2016). Using crowdsourcing websites for sociological research: the case of Amazon Mechanical Turk. The American Sociologist, 47(1), 47–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shi, L. (2018). A neglected population: fear of crime and news consumption among international students in the U.S. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. Published online before print at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0886260518766428

  • Shi, L., Lu, Y., & Pickett, J. T. (2020). The public salience of crime, 1960-2014: age-period-cohort and time-series analyses. Criminology, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12248.

  • Simon, J. (2007). Governing through crime: how the war on crime transformed American democracy and created a culture of fear. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Sprott, J. B., & Doob, A. N. (1997). Fear, victimization, and attitudes to sentencing, the courts, and the police. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 39, 275–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C. R., Bobadilla-Suarez, S., Lazzaro, S. C., & Sharot, T. (2016). How people update beliefs about climate change: Good news and bad news. Cornell Law Review, 102, 1431–1444.

  • Thomas, C. W., & Foster, S. C. (1975). A sociological perspective on public support for capital punishment. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 45(4), 641–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, A., & Pickett, J. T. (2019). Are relationship inferences from crowdsourced and opt-in samples generalized? Comparing criminal justice attitudes in the GSS and five online samples. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1-26.

  • Tomczyk, S., Isensee, B., & Hanewinkel, R. (2016). Latent classes of polysubstance use among adolescents—a systematic review. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 160, 12–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Boeckmann, R. J. (1997). Three strikes and you are out, but why? The psychology of public support for punishing rule breakers. Law and Society Review, 31, 237–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Unnever, J. D., Cochran, J. K., Cullen, F. T., & Applegate, B. K. (2010). The pragmatic American: attributions of crime and the hydraulic relation hypothesis. Justice Quarterly, 27(3), 431–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Unnever, J. D., & Cullen, F. T. (2009). Empathetic identification and punitiveness: a middle-range theory of individual differences. Theoretical Criminology, 13(3), 283–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Unnever, J. D., & Cullen, F. T. (2010). The social sources of Americans’ punitiveness: a test of three competing models. Criminology, 48(1), 99–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Census. (2017). Age and sex tables. Retrieved from www. census. gov.

  • Useem, B., Liedka, R. V., & Piehl, A. M. (2003). Popular support for the prison build-up. Punishment & Society, 5(1), 5–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan, T. J., Bell Holleran, L., & Silver, J. R. (2019). Applying moral foundations theory to the explanation of capital jurors’ sentencing decisions. Justice Quarterly, 1–30.

  • Walmsley, R. (2016). World prison population list. London: Institute for Criminal Policy Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg, J. D., Freese, J., & McElhattan, D. (2014). Comparing data characteristics and results of an online factorial survey between a population-based and a crowdsource-recruited sample. Sociological Science, 1.

  • Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, B. (1993). On sin versus sickness: a theory of perceived responsibility and social motivation. American Psychologist, 48(9), 957–965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan, S. (2017). Search for the hidden punishments: an alternative approach to studying alternative sanctions. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 33, 21–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan, S. (2019). Does criminal specialization predict case processing? Crime & Delinquency, 65(12), 1648–1688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimring, F. E. (2003). The contradictions of American capital punishment. Oxford University Press.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Dr. Justin Pickett for his generous help with data collection and manuscript review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Criminal Justice, Bridgewater State University, 131 Summer Street, Bridgewater, MA, 02325, USA

    Luzi Shi

Authors
  1. Luzi Shi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luzi Shi.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

ESM 1

(DOCX 4603 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shi, L. Crime trend perceptions, negative emotions, and public punitiveness: a survey experiment of information treatment. J Exp Criminol 18, 277–295 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-020-09454-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-020-09454-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation