Public Opinion and Punitivity

Kury, Helmut; Ferdinand, Theodore N.

doi:10.1016/s0160-2527(99)00016-3

Cited by 50 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The final response rate after two recalls was 44%, which yielded a total of 1,881 respondents on a basis of 4,192 valid questionnaires. This response rate is similar to the percentage reported by Kury & Ferdinand (1999) in Germany, and higher than in other surveys done on similar objects in Switzerland (Oswald, Hupfeld, Klug, & Gabriel, 2002) and elsewhere (Sims & Johnston, 2004;Wenzel & Thielmann, 2006).…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Men's favored purpose for prison is the protection of society, whereas more women believe that rehabilitation should be the main goal of imprisonment (Applegate, Cullen, & Fisher, 2002). Moreover, men are more likely to favor capital punishment and to support more punitive sanctioning than women (Applegate et al, 2002;Kury & Ferdinand, 1999;Mears, 2001;Sims & Johnston, 2004). Applegate and colleagues speak of a ''potentially important gap between men's and women's attitudes toward crime, punishment, and corrections'' (Applegate et al, 2002, p. 98).…”

Section: Sentencing Attitudes As Social Representationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some sections of the public call for harsher punishments, including the introduction or extension of the death penalty (Kury & Ferdinand, 1999) while others advocate alternative sanctions to imprisonment such as restitution and community service (Hough & Roberts, 1999;Roberts & Stalans, 2000). Debates about punitiveness and punishment goals raged in the last two decades in various Western countries, showing a lack of consensus on those issues.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Subjective Proximity to Crime or Social Representations? Explaining Sentencing Attitudes in Switzerland

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lay sentencing attitudes are considered in the light of two theoretical perspectives. The first perspective views sentencing attitudes as parts of broader sets of social representations anchored in one's position in the social structure. The second perspective explains sentencing attitudes by their subjective experiences of crime. This paper tests both theories by performing a series of multiple regressions on two dimensions of sentencing: punishment goals and severity of punishment. Empirical data comes from a quantitative survey conducted in Switzerland. Findings reveal that indicators of subjective proximity to crime largely account for sentencing attitudes. Nevertheless, social representations of crime measured by causes of crime also have a significant impact on sentencing attitudes. Implications of these findings for sentencing in Western democracies are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Sentencing Attitudes As Social Representationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Subjective Proximity to Crime or Social Representations? Explaining Sentencing Attitudes in Switzerland

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They may be more appropriately considered convenient 'ready-reckoners' (Kilcommins et al 2004: 250) which, presented in their raw form, do not take account of a jurisdiction's crime problem (or, as Lynch (1988) colourfully puts it, the 'provocation' to which the state was exposed). Aside from imprisonment rates, a number of commonly used indices of punitiveness can be identified from the literature such as the use of the death penalty (Kury and Ferdinand 1999;Lynch 2005;: xii-xiv); enactment of mandatory sentences (Garland 2001;Pratt et al 2005: xii-xiv); 'shaming' sanctions (Garland 2001;Pratt 2002;Pratt et al 2005: xii-xiv); and sex offender notification schemes (Garland 2001;Pratt et al 2005: xii-xiv;Brown 2008). The use of these singular or few-item measures is problematic not only in relation to the partial representation of the punitiveness concept, but also in terms of the bias which may be introduced in the selection process (Kutateladze 2009).…”

Section: Deconstructing Punitivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconceptualizing Penality: Towards a Multidimensional Measure of Punitiveness

Hamilton¹

2014

British Journal of Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…otázka na to, zda jsou tresty za kriminalitu dostatečně přísné), respondenti se zpravidla projeví velmi punitivně. Většina z nich se vysloví v tom smyslu, že tresty jsou příliš mírné nebo justice k pachatelům příliš shovívavá [Kury, Ferdinand 1999;Stalans, Diamond 1990]. Méně punitivní obrázek veřejného mínění bychom měli získat tehdy, bude-li zjišťování postojů založeno na posouzení konkrétní kriminální kauzy a rozhodnutí respondenta o trestu pro jejího pachatele [Roberts, Hough 2005].…”

Section: Jak Lze Punitivitu Měřit?unclassified

Methodological Aspects of Measuring the Czech Public's Attitudes to the Punishment of Offenders

Moravcová

Tomášek

2014

Czech Sociological Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The trend towards harsher punishment of offenders, usually termed the 'new punitiveness', is often explained as a response to deepening social and economic uncertainty. One important area that criminal policy research has long dealt with is public attitudes to punishment. Statements that the public want more severe punishments for those who break the law are often used to justify introducing measures to make the criminal justice system harsher. There are, however, different ways to measure public opinion on criminal sentencing. While general attitudinal questions indicate the public to be very punitive in outlook, when they have to evaluate specifi c cases the results are slightly more positive. Drawing on data from the European Social Survey, the article aims to describe the current level of punitiveness in the Czech Republic, as measured by both above-mentioned indicators, and to assess whether the respondents' answers to such indicators are infl uenced by the same factors. Data show that Czechs tend to have relatively strong punitive attitudes. However, past studies have shown that people are less punitively inclined when they are judging a specifi c case. Moreover, regression analysis suggests that, rather than individual punitive sentiments, the general measure of punitiveness refl ects cognitive and emotional reactions of a different nature (e.g. the quality of work of the court system), which means that the information on public attitudes it produces could be misleading.

show abstract

Public Opinion and Punitivity

Cited by 50 publications

References 7 publications

Subjective Proximity to Crime or Social Representations? Explaining Sentencing Attitudes in Switzerland

Subjective Proximity to Crime or Social Representations? Explaining Sentencing Attitudes in Switzerland

Reconceptualizing Penality: Towards a Multidimensional Measure of Punitiveness

Methodological Aspects of Measuring the Czech Public's Attitudes to the Punishment of Offenders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About