An attributional examination of retributive versus utilitarian philosophies of punishment
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Two basic goals of punishment—retribution and utility—and the means to those goals, including isolation, rehabilitation, and the creation of fear, were first examined. The objectives of punishment were then related to attributions regarding the cause of a transgression. It was documented that punishment goals are mediated by the expectancies and affects that are elicited by causal beliefs. It also was argued that the purposes of punishment are more state-like than trait-like, for they change as a function of the reason for a transgression. Data from three laboratory experiments, as well as a field study regarding reactions to O. J. Simpson for his alleged crimes, were presented in support of the above beliefs. In addition, the morality of retribution versus utilitarianism was discussed in the context of the caning of Michael Fay in Singapore. It is suggested that rehabilitation may be the most moral of the punishment means.
- Bailey, W. C., and Peterson, R. D. (1994). Murder, capital punishment, and deterrence: A review of the evidence and an examination of police killings.J. Soc. Issues 50: 53–74.
- Carroll, J. S. (1978). Causal attributions in expert parole decisions.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., 36: 1501–1511. CrossRef
- Carroll, J. S., and Payne, J. W. (1976). The psychology of the parole decision process: A joint application of attribution theory and information-processing psychology. In Carroll, J. S., and Pavne, J. W. (eds.),Cognition and Social Behavior, Halsted, New York.
- Darley, J. M., and Zanna, M. P. (1982). Making moral judgments.Am. Sci., 70: 515–521.
- Ellsworth, P. C., and Gross, S. R. (1994). Hardening of the attitudes: Americans’ views of the death penalty.J. Soc. Issues, 50: 19–52. CrossRef
- Feinberg, J. (1970).Doing and Deserving: Essays on the Theory of Responsibility, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
- Fincham, F. D., and Jaspars, J. M. (1980). Attribution of responsibility: From man the scientist to man as lawyer. In Berkowitz, L. (ed.),Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 13, Academic Press, New York, pp. 81–138.
- Furnham, A., and Henderson, M. (1983). Lay theories of delinquency.Eur. J. Soc. Psychol., 13: 107–120. CrossRef
- Gert, B. (1988).Morality: A New Justification of the Moral Rules, Oxford University Press, New York.
- Graham, S., Weiner, B., and Zucker, G. S. (1997). An attributional analysis of punishment goals and public reactions to O. J. Simpson.Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 23: 331–346. CrossRef
- Hart, H. A., and Honoré, A. M. (1959).Causation in the Law, Clarendon Press, Oxford, U.K.
- Hogarth, J. (1971).Sentencing as a Human Process, University of Toronto Press, Toronto.
- Katz, L. (1987).Bad Acts and Guilty Minds, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
- Kant, I. (1964).Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals (Trans. Lewis W. Beck).
- McFatter, R. (1978). Sentencing strategies and justice: Effects of punishment philosophy on sentencing decisions.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 36: 1490–1500. CrossRef
- McFatter, R. (1982). Purposes of punishment: Effects of utilities of criminal sanction on perceived appropriateness.J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 67: 255–267. CrossRef
- Moore, M. (1987). The moral worth of retribution. In Schoeman, F. (ed.),Responsibility, Character, and the Emotions. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 179–219.
- Morse, S. J. (1978). Crazy behavior, morals and science: An analysis of mental healthy law.Southern California Law Rev. 51: 527–654.
- Morse, S. J. (1985). Excusing the crazy: The insanity defense reconsidered.Southern California Law Rev. 58: 777–837.
- Murphy, J. C., and Coleman, J. L. (1990).Philosophy of Law: An Introduction to Jurisprudence, Westview Press, Boulder, CO.
- National Research Council. (1993).Understanding Child Abuse and Neglect, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
- Rawls, J. (1955). Concepts of rules.Philos. Rev. 64: 4–5. CrossRef
- Reyna, C., and Weiner, B. (1997). Punishment goals in achievement and criminal domains. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Los Angeles.
- Robinson, P., and Darley, J. (1995).Justice, Liability, and Blame, Westview, Boulder, CO.
- Savage, D. G. (1996, July 11). Florida’s tough teen crime stance may be wrong.Los Angeles Times, pp. A1, A14.
- Schlenker, B., Britt, T., Pennington, J., Murphy, R., and Doherty, K. (1994). The triangle model of responsibility.Psychol. Rev. 101: 632–652. CrossRef
- Sesser, S. (1993).The Lands of Charm and Cruelty, Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
- Shultz, T. R., Schleifer, M., and Altman, I. (1981). Judgments of causation, responsibility, and punishment in cases of harm-doing.Can. J. Behav. Sci. 13: 238–253.
- Van Der Haag, E. (1982). Could successful rehabilitation reduce the crime rate?J. Crim. Law Criminol. 73: 1022–1035. CrossRef
- Vidmar, N., and Miller, D. (1980). Social psychological processes underlying attitudes toward legal punishment.Law Psychol. Rev. 14: 565–602.
- Weiner, B. (1986).An Attributional Theory of Motivation and Emotion, Springer-Verlag, New York.
- Weiner, B. (1995).Judgments of Responsibility: A Foundation for a Theory of Social Conduct, Guilford, New York.
- An attributional examination of retributive versus utilitarian philosophies of punishment
Social Justice Research
Volume 10, Issue 4 , pp 431-452
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links