Skip to main content

Is Deterrence Effective? Results of a Meta-Analysis of Punishment

European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research volume 15, pages 201–224 (2009)Cite this article

Abstract

It is supposed that threats of punishment deter potential criminals from committing crimes. The correctness of this theory is, however, questionable. Numerous empirical investigations have come to different results. In this article a meta-analysis is described which tries to find out the reasons for the different findings. First evaluations indicate that the methods of research have an influence on the results and that a possible deterring effect of the penal law can only be covered reasonably with a very differentiating model. Not all criminal acts can be influenced by deterrence. It appears that the most significant deterrent effects can be achieved in cases of minor crime, administrative offences and infringements of informal social norms. In cases of homicide, on the other hand, the meta-analysis does not indicate that the death penalty has a deterrent effect. According to the results, the validity of the deterrence hypothesis must be looked at in a differenciated manner.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Diagram 1
Diagram 2
Diagram 3
Diagram 4
Diagram 5
Diagram 6
Diagram 7
Diagram 8
Diagram 9
Diagram 10
Diagram 11
Diagram 12
Diagram 13
Diagram 14
Diagram 15

Notes

  1. http://www.ifk.jura.uni-tuebingen.de/krimdok/

  2. http://www.apa.org/psycinfo/

  3. http://www.csa.com/factsheets/socioabs-set-c.php

  4. http://www.library.ucsf.edu/db/socserv.html

  5. http://www.sciencedirect.com

  6. http://isi1.isiknowledge.com/portal.cgi?DestApp=WOS&Func=Frame

  7. http://papers.nber.org.papers.html

  8. http://ideas.repec.org/

  9. http://www.ssrn.com/

  10. http://www.wiso-net.de/indiv startseiten/pool01.ein

  11. http://www.ingentaconnect.com

  12. http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/

  13. http://netec.mcc.ac.uk/WoPEc.html

  14. http://www.iza.org

  15. http://www.psycinfo.com/psycarticles/

  16. http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/IBSS/

  17. In high sample sizes t-values under -1.96 are significant on the 5% level. This marginal value is lower in the case of small sample sizes. “Normalisation” consists of an adjustment of the t-values with small sample size; for these cases t-values are calculated that would be obtained were the sample size higher, but the probability of error for the estimate remains unchanged. As a result of this normalisation, the value t=-1.96 is always the boundary between significant and non-significant estimates, irrespective of the sample size.

References

  • Antony, J., & Entorf, H. (2003). Zur Gültigkeit der Abschreckung im Sinne der ökonomischen Theorie der Kriminalität: Grundzüge einer Meta-Studie. In H.-J. Albrecht, & H. Entorf (Eds.), Kriminalität, Ökonomie und Europäischer Sozialstaat (pp. 167–185). Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atteslander, P. (2003). Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung. 12th edn. Berlin: Schmidt-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beccaria, C. (1766). Über Verbrechen und Strafen. Übersetzt und herausgegeben von W. Alff, 1988. Frankfurt/Main: Insel-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. S. (1968). Crime and Punishment: an Economic Approach. Journal of Political Economy, 76(2), 169–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentham, J. (1823). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Überarbeitete Auflage, 1907. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buikhuisen, W. (1974). General Deterrence: Research and Theory. Abstracts on Criminology and Penology, 14(3), 285–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, S. (1988). The Economics of Crime Deterrence: A Survey of Theory and Evidence. Kyklos, 41(2), 301–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. (1991). Grundlagen der Sozialtheorie, Vol. 1: Handlungen und Handlungssysteme. München: Oldenbourg Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diekmann, A. (2008). Empirische Sozialforschung. Grundlagen, Methoden, Anwendungen. 19th edition Reinbek: Rowohlt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlich, I. (1973). Participation in Illegitimate Activities: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation. Journal of Political Economy, 81(3), 521–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisele, H. (1999). Die general- und spezialpräventive Wirkung strafrechtlicher Sanktionen. Methoden, Ergebnisse, Metaanalyse (Ph.D. thesis). Heidelberg, University of Heidelberg.

  • Esser, H. (1999). Soziologie. Spezielle Grundlagen, Vol. 1: Situationslogik und Handeln. 3rd edn. Frankfurt/M.: Campus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farin, E. (1994). Forschungsperspektive und Methodik der Metaanalyse. Forschungsberichte des Psychologischen Instituts der Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, No. 113. Freiburg i. Br.: Albert-Ludwigs-Universität.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feuerbach, P. J. A. (1799). Revision der Grundsätze und Grundbegriffe des positiven peinlichen Rechts 1. Erfurt: Henningsche Buchhandlung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fricke, R., & Treinis, G. (1985). Einführung in die Metaanalyse. Methoden der Psychologie, Vol. 3. Bern u.a.: Huber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis. San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreuzer, A. (2004). Prävention durch Repression. In J.-M. Jehle (Ed.), Angewandte Kriminologie zwischen Freiheit und Sicherheit (pp. 205–218). Mönchengladbach: Forum Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kromrey, H. (2006). Empirische Sozialforschung. 11th edn. Opladen: UTB Leske + Budrich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagin, D. (1978). General Deterrence: A Review of the Empirical Evidence. In A. Blumstein, J. Cohen, & D. Nagin (Eds.), Deterrence and Incapacitation: Estimating the Effects of Criminal Sanctions on Crime Rates (pp. 95–139). Washington D.C.: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research. Revised Edition. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, T. (2008). Meta Analysis of Crime and Deterrence: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature (Ph.D. thesis). Darmstadt: Technical University. http://tuprints.ulb.tu-darmstadt.de/1054/2/rupp_diss.pdf(11/2008)

  • Stanley, T. D. (2001). From Wheat to Chaff: Meta-Analysis as Quantitative Literature Review. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(3), 131–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, F. M. (1986). Meta-Analysis. Quantitative Methods for Research Synthesis. University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences 59. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

    Dieter Dölling

  2. University of Frankfurt on the Main, Frankfurt, Germany

    Horst Entorf

  3. University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

    Dieter Hermann

  4. Technical University of Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany

    Thomas Rupp

Authors
  1. Dieter Dölling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Horst Entorf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dieter Hermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thomas Rupp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dieter Dölling.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dölling, D., Entorf, H., Hermann, D. et al. Is Deterrence Effective? Results of a Meta-Analysis of Punishment. Eur J Crim Policy Res 15, 201–224 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-008-9097-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-008-9097-0

Keywords

  • Deterrence
  • General prevention
  • Meta-analysis