Skip to main content
Log in

The Role of Moral Disengagement in the Execution Process

  • Published:
Law and Human Behavior

Abstract

The present study tested the proposition that disengagement of moral self-sanctions enables prison personnel to carry out the death penalty. Three subgroups of personnel in penitentiaries located in three Southern states were assessed in terms of eight mechanisms of moral disengagement. The personnel included the execution teams that carry out the executions; the support teams that provide solace and emotional support to the families of the victims and the condemned inmate; and prison guards who have no involvement in the execution process. The executioners exhibited the highest level of moral, social, and economic justifications, disavowal of personal responsibility, and dehumanization. The support teams that provide the more humane services disavowed moral disengagement, as did the noninvolved guards but to a lesser degree than the support teams.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andrus, B. C. (1969). The infamous of Nuremberg. London: Fravin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldus, D. C., & Woodworth, G. (2001). Race of victim and race of defendant disparities in the administration of Maryland’s capital charging and sentencing system (1979–1996): Preliminary finding.

  • Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of moral thought and action. In W. M. Kurtines & J. L. Gewirtz (Eds.), Handbook of moral behavior and development: Theory, research and applications (Vol. 1, pp. 71–129). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1990.

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 193–209.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (2002). Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Moral Education, 31, 101–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (2003) Role of mechanisms of selective moral disengagement in terrorism and counterterrorism. In F. M. Mogahaddam & A. J. Marsella (Eds.), Understanding terrorism (pp. 121–150). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (in press). Training in terrorism through selective moral disengagement. In J. F. Forest (Ed.), The making of a terrorist: recruitment, training and root causes. New York: Praeger.

  • Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 364–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Pastorelli, C., & Regalia, C. (2001). Sociocognitive self-regulatory mechanisms governing transgressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 125–135.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., Caprara, G. V., & Zsolnai, L. (2002). Corporate transgressions. In L. Zsolnai (Ed.), Ethics in the economy: Handbook of business ethics (pp. 151–164). Oxford: Peter Lang Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., Underwood, B., & Fromson, M. E. (1975). Disinhibition of aggression through diffusion of responsibility and dehumanization of victims. Journal of Research in Personality, 9, 253–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolinger, D. (1980). Language—the loaded weapon: The use and abuse of language today. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowers, W. J., & Steiner, B. D. (1999) Death by default: An empirical demonstration of false and forced choices in capital sentencing. Texas Law Review, 77, 605–717.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabana, D. A. (1996). Death at midnight: The confession of an Executioner. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E. (1977). Deindividuation: Causes and consequences. Social Behavior and Personality, 5, 143–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Dineen, J., Endresen, K., Beaman, A. L., & Fraser, S. C. (1975). Effects of altered responsibility, cognitive set, and modeling on physical aggression and deindividuation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 328–337.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, D. S., & Rhinehart, M. (1995). Moral disengagement, delinquent peers and delinquent behavior. Unpublished manuscript, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado.

  • Ellsworth, P. (1978, October). Attitudes toward capital punishment: From application to theory. Paper presented at the SESP Symposium on Psychology and Law, Stanford University.

  • Ellsworth, P. C., & Ross, L. (1983). Public opinion and capital punishment: A close examination of the views of abolitionists and retentionists. Crime and Delinquency, 29, 116–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambino, R. (1973, November–December). Watergate lingo: A language of non-responsibility. Freedom at Issue, (No. 22), 7–9, 15–17.

  • Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2, 271–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, S. R., & Ellsworth, P. C. (2003). Second thoughts: Americans’ views on the death penalty at the turn of the century. In S. P. Garvey (Ed.), Beyond repair? America’s death penalty. (pp. 7–57). Durham & London: Duke university Press, pp 7–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haney, C. (1997). Violence and the capital jury: Mechanisms of moral disengagement and the impulse to condemn to death. Stanford Law Review, 49, 1447–1486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haney, C., Banks, W. C., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1973). Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology & Penology, 1, 69–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haritos-Fatouros, M. (2002). The psychological origins of institutionalized torture. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huggins, M., Haritos-Fatouros, M., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2002). Violence workers: Police torturers and murderers reconstruct Brazilian atrocities. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivie, R. L. (1980). Images of savagery in American justifications for war. Communication Monographs, 47, 270–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. (1998). Death work: A study of the modern execution process. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keen, S. (1986). Faces of the enemy. San Francisco: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelman, H. C. (1973). Violence without moral restraint: Reflections on the dehumanization of victims and victimizers. Journal of Social Issues, 29, 25–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelman, H. C., & Hamilton, V. L. (1989). Crimes of obedience: Toward a social psychology of authority and responsibility. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, K., Coleman, D., Forges, J., & Johnson, R. (1971). Is the subject’s personality or the experimental situation a better predictor of a subject’s willingness to administer shock to a victim? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 22, 287–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lifton, R. J., & Mitchell, G. (2000). Who owns death? New York: Harpers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marine, C. (1990, March). Death’s doorman. San Francisco Examiner, p. B5.

  • McAlister, A., Bandura, A., & Owen, S. (2004a). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in support of military force: The impact of 9/11. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • McAlister, A., Bandura, A., & Owen, S. (2004b). Moral disengagement in support of the death penalty. Houston: University of Texas. In preparation.

  • Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, A. (1986). The obedience experiments: A case study of controversy in social science. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osofsky, M. J., & Osofsky, H. J. (2002). The psychological experience of security officers who work with executions. Psychiatry, 65, 358–370.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Prejean, H. (1993). Dead man walking: An eyewitness account of the death penalty in the United States. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport, D. C., & Alexander, Y. (Eds.). (1982). The morality of terrorism: Religious and secular justification. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reich, W. (Ed.). (1990). Origins of terrorism: Psychologies, ideologies, theologies, states of mind. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

  • Reiss, A. J., Jr. (1971). The police and the public. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rimer, S. (2000). In the busiest death chamber, duty carries its own burdens. NewYork Times, p. 1.

  • Sprinzak, E. (1986, September). Fundamentalism, terrorism, and democracy: The case of the Gush Emunim underground. Paper presented at the Woodrow Wilson Center, Washington, DC.

  • Sprinzak, E. (1990). The psychopolitical formation of extreme left terrorism in a democracy: The case of the Weathermen. In W. Reich (Ed.), Origins of terrorism: Psychologies, ideologies, theologies, states of mind (pp. 65–85). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sykes, G., & Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency. American Sociological Review, 22, 664–670.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilker, H. A. (1970). Socially responsible behavior as a function of observer responsibility and victim feedback. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14, 95–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toch, H. (1980). Violent men. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trombley, S. (1993). The execution protocol: Inside America’s capital punishment industry. New York: Anchor Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegner, L. D. M. (1989). White bears and other unwanted thoughts. New York: Viking Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimbardo, P. G. (1969). The human choice: Individuation, reason, and order versus deindividuation, impulse, and chaos. In W. J. Arnold & D. Levine (Eds.), Nebraska symposium on motivation, 1969 (pp. 237–309). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

  • Zimbardo, P. G. (1995). The psychology of evil: A situationist perspective on recruiting good people to engage in anti-social acts. Research in Social Psychology, 11, 125–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimbardo, P. G. (2004). A situationist perspective on the psychology of evil: Understanding how good people are transformed into perpetrators. In A. Miller (Ed.), The social psychology of good and evil (pp. 21–50) New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Michael J. Osofsky, Albert Bandura or Philip G. Zimbardo.

About this article

Cite this article

Osofsky, M.J., Bandura, A. & Zimbardo, P.G. The Role of Moral Disengagement in the Execution Process. Law Hum Behav 29, 371–393 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-005-4930-1

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-005-4930-1

Keywords

Navigation