Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Public attitudes towards the death penalty

  • Published:
Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Responses to a general question regarding the use of the death penalty were compared with the sentences that respondents chose in a set of scenarios describing homicide cases. The percentage of respondents who assigned the death sentence in one or more of the following scenarios was higher than those who favored the death penalty in the abstract question, but there were inconsistencies in the answers. A majority assigned the death penalty only for the most heinous offender described, and the figures were lower for other crimes, even clear cases of first degree murder. At the same time, a manipulation involving information about methods of execution did not affect answers. These results strongly suggest that the abstract questions typically used in public opinion polls do not accurately reflect the public's feelings about use of the death penalty in specific cases. More generally, research on public opinion regarding criminal justice policies should survey a variety of specific circumstances.

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

  • Barnett, A. (1985). Some distribution patterns for the Georgia death sentence.U. C. Davis Law Review,18, 1327–1374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowers, W. J. (1993). Capital punishment and contemporary values: People's misgivings and the Court's misperception.Law and Society, 27, 157–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanzo, S. & Costanzo, M. (1994). Life and death decisions: An analysis of capital jury decision making under the special issues sentencing framework.Law and Human Behavior, 18, 151–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, M. & Tanford, S. (1989). An alternative method of capital jury selection.Law and Human Behavior, 13, 167–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cumberland, J., & E. Zamble (1992). General and specific measures of public attitudes: Release decisions.Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 24, 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doob, A., & Roberts, J. (1983). Sentencing: An analysis of the public's view.Report to the Department of Justice.

  • Ellsworth, P.C. (1991). To tell what we know or wait for Godot?Law and Human Behavior, 15, 77–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellsworth, P.C., Bukaty, R. M., Cowan, C. L. & Thompson, W. C. (1984). The death-qualified jury and the defense of insanity.Law and Human Behavior, 8, 81–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellsworth, P. C. & Gross, S. R. (1994). Hardening of the attitudes: Americans' views of the death penalty.Journal of Social Issues.50, 19–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkel, N. J., Hughes, K. C., Smith, S. F. & Hurabiell, M. L. (1994). Killing kids: The juvenile death penalty and community sentiment.Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 12, 5–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, R. & Ellsworth, P. C. (1984). Due process vs. crime control: Death qualification and jury attitudes.Law and Human Behavior, 8, 31–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, J. A., Radelet, M. L., & Bonsteel, J. L. (1990–91). Death penalty opinion in the post-Furman years.Review of Law & Social Change, 18, 499–528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haney, C., Hurtado, A. & Vega, L. (1994). Modern death qualification: New data on its biasing effects.Law and Human Behavior, 18, 619–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honeyman, J. C. & Ogloff, J. R. P. (1996). Capital punishment: Arguments for life and death.Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 28, 27–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalven, H. & Zeisel, H. (1966).The American Jury. Boston: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. (1984). Public opinion and capital punishment: The effects of attitudes upon memory.,Canadian Journal of Criminology, 26.

  • Robinson, R. J. (1993) What does “unwilling” to impose the death penalty mean anyway? Another look at excludable jurors.Law and Human Behavior, 17, 471–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandys, M. & McGarnell, E. F. (1995). Attitudes toward capital punishment: Preference for the penalty or mere acceptance?,Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 32, 191–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, W. C., Cowan, C. L., Ellsworth, P. C. & Harrington, J. C. (1984). Death penalty attitudes and conviction proneness: The translation of attitudes into verdicts.Law and Human Behavior, 8, 95–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidmar, N. & Ellsworth, P. (1974). Public opinion and the death penalty.Stanford Law Review, 26, 1245–1270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidmar, N. & Dittenhoffer, T. (1981). Informed public opinion and death penalty attitudes.Canadian Journal of Criminology, 23, 43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamble, E., & K. L. Kalm (1990). General and specific measures of public attitudes toward sentencing.Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 22, 327–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kingston Penitentiary, Kingston, Canada

    Jeremy Mills

  2. Queen's University, K7L 3N6, Kingston, Ontario, Canada

    Edward Zamble Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Jeremy Mills
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Edward Zamble Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mills, J., Zamble, E. Public attitudes towards the death penalty. J Police Crim Psych 13, 76–86 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02806715

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02806715

Keywords

Search

Navigation