Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Examining Causal Attributions Towards Crime on Support for Offender Rehabilitation

  • Published:
American Journal of Criminal Justice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigates the predictors of support for rehabilitation among 899 residents of one county in Western New York. The results from the current study indicate that respondents strongly support rehabilitation as a goal of punishment. The findings show that sex and political ideology are important predictors of support with females and those holding a more liberal political ideology being more supportive of rehabilitation than males and conservatives. In addition, the study found support for the idea that one’s causal attributions towards crime influence their views toward punishment. Five of the causal attribution scales assessing support for different theoretical perspectives (strain/critical, social bond/attachment, deterrence, biological, and labeling) were found to significantly impact one’s overall support for rehabilitation.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Applegate, B. K., Cullen, F. T., & Fisher, B. S. (2002). Public views toward crime and correctional policies is there a gender gap? Journal of Criminal Justice, 30, 89–100. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.24.2.225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Applegate, B. K., Cullen, F. T., Fisher, B. S., & VenderVen, T. (2000). Forgiveness and fundamentalism: Reconsidering the relationship between correctional attitudes and religion. Criminology, 38(3), 719–753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, F. B., & Yarnold, P. R. (1995). Principal-components analysis and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In L. Grimm & P. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understanding multivariate statistics. Washington DC: APA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. S., Perkowitz, W. T., Lurigio, A. J., & Weaver, F. M. (1987). Sentencing goals, causal attributions, ideology, and personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1), 107–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiricos, T., Welch, K., & Gertz, M. (2004). Racial typification of crime and support for punitive measures. Criminology, 42(2), 359–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clear, T. R., Cole, G. F., & Reisig, M. D. (2011). American corrections (9th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, C. L., & Lane, J. (2009). The place of public fear in sentencing and correctional policy. Journal of Criminal Justice, 37, 586–595. doi:10.1016/j.crimjus.2009.09.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, D. W., Bynum, T. S., Hula, R. C., & Morash, M. A. (1997). Attitudes toward crime and criminal justice: What you find depends on what you ask (Briefing Paper No. 97-20). East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Public Policy and Social Research.

  • Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The Total Design Method. New York: Wiley.

  • Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, T. D., & Adams, M. (2003). Salvation or damnation?: Religion and correctional ideology. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 28(1), 15–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falco, D. L., & Martin, J. S. (2012). Examining punitiveness: assessing views toward the punishment of offenders among criminology and non-criminology students. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 23(2), 205–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gideon, L., & Loveland, N. (2011). Public attitudes toward rehabilitation and reintegration: How supportive are people of getting-tough-on-crime policies and the second chance act? In L. Gideon & H. E. Sung (Eds.), Rethinking corrections: Rehabilitation, reentry, & reintegration (pp. 19–34). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasmick, H. G., & McGill, A. L. (1994). Religion, attribution style, and punitiveness toward juvenile offenders. Criminology, 32(1), 23–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Indermaur, D. I., Roberts, L., Spiranovic, G. M., & Gelb, K. (2012). A matter of judgment: the effect of information and deliberation on public attitudes to punishment. Punishment and Society, 14(2), 147–165. doi:10.1177/1462474511434430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiber, M. J., & Woodrick, A. C. (1997). Religious beliefs, attributional styles, and adherence to correctional orientations. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 24(4), 495–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackey, D. A., Courtright, K. E., & Packard, S. H. (2006). Testing the rehabilitative ideal among college students. Criminal Justice Studies, 19(2), 153–170. doi:10.1080/147860010600764535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagin, D. S., Piquero, A. P., Scott, E. S., & Steinberg, L. (2006). Public preferences for rehabilitation versus incarceration of juvenile offenders: evidence from a contingent valuation survey. Criminology and Public Policy, 5(4), 627–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omera, M., & McGuinness, T. (2012). How women changed the outcome of the election. In Center for American Progress. Retrieved November 21, 2012, from http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/women/report/2012/12/12/47916/how-women-changed-the-outcome-of-the-election/.

  • Piquero, A. R., Cullen, F. T., Unnever, J. D., Piquero, N. L., & Gordon, J. A. (2010). Never too late: public optimism about juvenile rehabilitation. Punishment & Society, 12(187), 187–207. doi:10.1177/1462474509357379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piquero, A. R., & Steinberg, L. (2010). Public preferences for rehabilitation versus incarceration of juvenile offenders. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 1–6. doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2009.11.01.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sims, B. (2003). The impact of causal attribution on correctional ideology: a national study. Criminal Justice Review, 28(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sims, B., & Johnston, E. (2004). Examining public opinion about crime and justice: a statewide study. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 15(3), 270–293. doi:10.1177/0887403403252668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Templeton, & Hartnagle, (2012). Causal attributions of crime and the public’s sentencing goals. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 45-65.

  • The Pew Research Center. (2003). The 2004 political landscape: Evenly divided and increasingly polarized. In The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. Retrieved October 13, 2012, from http://www.people-press.org/2003/11/05/the-2004-political-landscape/.

  • Ward, T., & Maruna, S. (2007). Rehabilitation: Beyond the risk paradigm. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice, Niagara University, 115 Timon Hall Niagara University, Lewiston, NY, 14109, USA

    Diana L. Falco

  2. Department of Criminal Justice, The College at Brockport, State University of New York, 350 New Campus Drive Brockport, Oswego, NY, 14420, USA

    Noelle C. Turner

Authors
  1. Diana L. Falco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Noelle C. Turner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diana L. Falco.

Additional information

This research was made possible through a grant awarded by the Research Council at Niagara University.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Falco, D.L., Turner, N.C. Examining Causal Attributions Towards Crime on Support for Offender Rehabilitation. Am J Crim Just 39, 630–641 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-013-9231-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-013-9231-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation