Testing Death Penalty Opinions With General Questions and A Specific Case Scenario: Potential Lessons From China

2021 ◽  
pp. 0306624X2110668
Author(s):  
Bin Liang ◽  
Hong Lu ◽  
Jianhong Liu
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Multivariate Analyses ◽  
Chinese Students ◽  
Case Scenario ◽  
Death Sentences ◽  
Crime Scenarios ◽  
Death Penalty Opinion

Despite rich literature on public opinion on capital punishment, only a few studies examined people’s death penalty support within specific contexts. None have explored if correlates that influence people’s opinion would hold the same effect in general questions and specific case scenarios. Similarly, the Marshall hypotheses have not been tested with specific crime scenarios. Based on a sample of 1,077 students in a quasiexperimental design, this study contrasts Chinese students’ death penalty opinion in general questions with a specific crime scenario, and tests the Marshall hypotheses with the latter. Compared to their support in general questions, students’ support for death sentences dropped significantly in the specific crime scenario. Multivariate analyses showed that different factors influenced people’s decisions in the general questions and in the specific case, and respondents’ choices of preferred punishment in the specific crime scenario failed to lend support to the Marshall hypotheses.

scholarly journals Public Opinion and Death Penalty Policy Under Direct Democracy Institutions: A Longitudinal Analysis of the American States

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-105
Author(s):  
Christian Caron
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Direct Democracy ◽  
Longitudinal Research ◽  
Policy Responsiveness ◽  
Majority Opinion ◽  
American States ◽  
Death Sentences ◽  
State Death

Capital punishment remains legal in most U.S. states even though only a small number of them regularly impose it. I attribute the persistence of death penalty statutes to the existence of direct democracy institutions in about half the states. Applying a longitudinal research design that leverages annual estimates of state death penalty opinion, I show that these institutions strengthen the connection between public opinion and capital punishment’s legality, indicating that they foster policy responsiveness. By extension, because citizens have generally favored capital punishment, I find that direct democracy states are more likely to have the death penalty. I also demonstrate that direct democracy increases the likelihood that policy will be congruent with majority opinion, especially in states where opinion leans strongly in one direction. The representation-enhancing effect of direct democracy, however, does not extend to the punishment’s application, as measured by states’ issuance of death sentences.

Public Opinion and Capital Punishment: A Close Examination of the Views of Abolitionists and Retentionists

1983 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phoebe C. Ellsworth ◽  
Lee Ross
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
Self Image ◽  
Legal Implications

A survey designed to examine the attitudinal and informational bases of people's opinions about the death penalty was administered to 500 Northern California residents (response rate = 96 percent). Of these, 58.8 percent were proponents of capital punishment, 30.8 percent were opponents, and 10.4 percent were undecided. When asked whether they favored mandatory, discretionary, or no death penalty for various crimes, respondents tended to treat these options as points on a scale of strength of belief, with mandatory penalties favored for the most serious crimes, rather than considering the questions of objectivity and fairness that have influenced the United States Supreme Court's considerations of these options. For no crime did a majority favor execution of all those convicted, even when a mandatory penalty was endorsed. Respondents were generally ignorant on factual issues related to the death penalty, and indicated that if their factual beliefs (in deterrence) were incorrect, their attitude would not be influenced. When asked about their reasons for favoring or opposing the death penalty, respondents tended to endorse all reasons consistent with their attitudes, indicating that the attitude does not stem from a set of reasoned beliefs, but may be an undifferenti ated, emotional reflection of one's ideological self-image. Opponents favored due process guarantees more than did Proponents. A majority of respondents said they would need more evidence to convict if a case was capital. Theoretical and legal implications of the results are discussed.

Death and Dignity in American Law

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Kaufman
Keyword(s):  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Basic Question ◽  
Legal Cases ◽  
Death Sentences ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Core Feature ◽  
American Law ◽  
Relational Concept ◽  
The Law

Dignity serves many purposes in American law, but the concept is perhaps most vital in decisions on the death penalty. Since 1972, when the Supreme Court briefly banned capital punishment, American jurists have debated whether death sentences violate “the dignity of man.” These legal debates describe dignity as an innately human attribute and a core feature of human nature. In practice, however, courts employ dignity to instantiate a particular model of democratic governance. Legal cases on the death penalty treat dignity as a fundamentally relational concept, less a characteristic of personhood than a state of existing in dialogue with the law. This vision of dignity is more institutional and alienable than conceptions that emphasize unwavering worth. Ultimately, the approach to dignity in death penalty cases displaces an individuated account of the term and raises a basic question about whether dignity can exist in the absence of the law.

Between hammer and anvil: the Russian Constitutional Court’s position on abolition of the death penalty

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 112-133
Author(s):  
Olga Komshukova
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Professional Community ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Key Factor

The key factor in maintaining a moratorium on the death penalty in Russia is its membership in the Council of Europe, which requires compliance with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the abolition of the death penalty. One of the proponents of maintaining Russia’s adherence to the Convention is the Russian Constitutional Court. However, the return of the death penalty as a capital punishment finds some support in Russia. Therefore, the Constitutional Court has to maintain a balance between two forces: internal pressure from public opinion and a number of conservative government representatives, and fidelity to the fundamental principles of the Russian Constitution and international law, backed up by international obligations undertaken by Russia. The purpose of this article is to identify and analyze contradictions among the priorities of the Russian Constitutional Court in its implementation of foreign and domestic legal policy through a political and legal analysis of its argumentation regarding the abolition of the death penalty. In turn, full-fledged analysis of the Court’s argument is possible only by taking into account the domestic and international contexts. The article is structured as follows: firstly, it examines the evolution of the question of the abolition of the death penalty in Russia and the main decisions of the Russian Constitutional Court related to the introduction and maintenance of a moratorium on the death penalty. Secondly, it examines the domestic context of decisions taken by the Court from the perspective of key actors (the professional community, government officials, public opinion). Thirdly, it considers the international context of decision-making (the development of relations between Russia and the Council of Europe, the Russian Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights, as well as foreign experience with the issue of abolition of the death penalty). In conclusion, the article analyzes the main arguments of the Russian Constitutional Court to justify the need to abolish the death penalty and discusses the role of the Constitutional Court in resolving the death penalty issue.

Public Opinion and the French Capital Punishment Debate of 1908

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 575-609 ◽  
Author(s):  
James M. Donovan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Lower House ◽  
Democratic Control ◽  
History Of

Academics have traditionally associated capital punishment most closely with authoritarian regimes. They have assumed an incompatibility between the death penalty and the presumably humane values of modern liberal democracy. However, recent scholarship on the United States by David Garland has suggested that a considerable degree of direct democratic control over a justice system actually tends to favor the retention and application of the death penalty. The reason why the United States has retained capital punishment after it has been abolished in other Western nations is not because public opinion is more supportive of the death penalty in America than in Europe or in Canada. Rather, it is because popular control over the justice system is greater in the United States than in other countries and this strengthens the influence of America's retentionist majority. However, the experience of the United States in this regard has not been unique. The same link between democratic control and retention of the death penalty can be seen in the history of the effort to abolish capital punishment in France. In 1908, a bill in the Chamber of Deputies (the lower house of the French Parliament) to abolish capital punishment was defeated, in large part because of strong opposition from the public. In 1981, majority public opinion in France still favored retention of the death penalty, but in that year, the nation's Parliament defied popular sentiment and outlawed the ultimate punishment. Historians have so far provided little insight into why abolition succeeded in 1981 when it failed in 1908. The explanation for the different outcome appears to have been the greater degree of influence public opinion exerted over the nation's justice system at the turn of the twentieth century than at its end.

Judicial Selection and Death Penalty Decisions

2014 ◽  
Vol 108 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
BRANDICE CANES-WRONE ◽  
TOM S. CLARK ◽  
JASON P. KELLY
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Judicial Behavior ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Judicial Selection ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
State Supreme Court ◽  
Selection Systems

Most U.S. state supreme court justices face elections or reappointment by elected officials, and research suggests that judicial campaigns have come to resemble those for other offices. We develop predictions on how selection systems should affect judicial decisions and test these predictions on an extensive dataset of death penalty decisions by state courts of last resort. Specifically, the data include over 12,000 decisions on over 2000 capital punishment cases decided between 1980 and 2006 in systems with partisan, nonpartisan, or retention elections or with reappointment. As predicted, the findings suggest that judges face the greatest pressure to uphold capital sentences in systems with nonpartisan ballots. Also as predicted, judges respond similarly to public opinion in systems with partisan elections or reappointment. Finally, the results indicate that the plebiscitary influences on judicial behavior emerge only after interest groups began achieving success at targeting justices for their decisions.

Varieties of Attack on the Death Penalty

1969 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Greenberg ◽  
Jack Himmelstein
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Challenge ◽  
Death Sentences ◽  
The Way

The latest execution in the United States occurred on June 2, 1967. Since then, death sentences have been stayed as courts across the country consider a legal challenge to the constitution ality of the death penalty. This paper describes the distorting effect that capital punishment has had on the legal system and the discriminations in the way it has been administered—for example, in rape cases it is applied almost exclusively to Negroes convicted of raping while women. The legal attack focuses on those procedural vices that reflect the arbitrariness and irration ality inherent in capital punishment. Courts are being called on to subject the death penalty to a reasoned examination and to test its validity against the commands of the Constitution, while the number of persons on the nation's death rows continues to grow past the 500 mark. This confrontation on the issue of capital punishment is part of the more general conflict taking place over how society may best cope with its problems without resort to violence.

scholarly journals Emilia Pardo Bazán, an Ethical Writer

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-81
Author(s):  
Dolores Thion Soriano-Mollá
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Cultural Context ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Moral Legitimacy ◽  
Emilia Pardo Bazan ◽  
Emilia Pardo Bazán

Within the cultural context of nineteenth-century Spain, Emilia Pardo Bazán uses literature to raise public awareness on the death penalty. Considering the seriousness of the issue, she thought that emotions – not reason – could allow people to have a better understanding and to form their own opinion. Thus, in La piedra angular, through the fictional word of Marineda, she examines the controversies linked to the legal, human, and moral legitimacy of capital punishment and to the figures of both the criminal and the executioner, but also to the nature of truth and public opinion.

It's Not What You Ask, It's the Way That You Ask It: Question Form and Public Opinion on the Death Penalty

1994 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
PETER R. JONES
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Strong Relationship ◽  
The United States ◽  
Opinion Poll ◽  
Question Format ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
Opinion Polls ◽  
The Way

For all their faults, public opinion polls are of great importance to public policymaking, especially on issues that are highly visible and controversial. In the context of capital punishment, researchers have repeatedly documented the strong relationship that exists among public, judicial, and legislative opinion. During the past two decades, popular public opinion poll results in the United States have shown considerable growth in the support of capital punishment. Although criticized as grossly overly simplistic, these polls are often employed to show that legislative and judicial decision making is “grounded” in consensual public opinion. A number of studies have questioned the validity of opinion polls as measures of attitudes on this issue—with apparent support for capital punishment dropping precipitously when alternative options, such as life imprisonment with absolutely no possibility of parole, are provided. The present article suggests that we are misinterpreting poll information in a more basic way—by effectively dissuading a “no opinion“ response through the use of a standard “no filter” question format. Even without providing additional information or alternatives to respondents, the present research suggests that reliance on standard questions that simply seek a favor/oppose response can overestimate support for and opposition to the death penalty. More important, the number of people with no clear opinion on this issue can almost double, simply by employing a different question format. Put simply, one of the most important determinants of public opinion on the death penalty is the way in which we pose the question.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document