Sentencing decisions around quantity thresholds: theory and experiment

IF 1.8 2区社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY

Journal of Experimental Criminology Pub Date : 2023-07-10 DOI:10.1007/s11292-023-09568-8

Jakub Drápal, Michal Šoltés

{"title":"Sentencing decisions around quantity thresholds: theory and experiment","authors":"Jakub Drápal, Michal Šoltés","doi":"10.1007/s11292-023-09568-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Objectives</h3><p>We study the effects of quantity thresholds (such as drug amount) used to divide offenses into subsections on sentencing decisions by professional sentencers</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>In a vignette experiment, 200 Czech prosecutors recommended a length of prison sentence in drug possession and theft cases</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>We provide experimental evidence that quantity thresholds increase the recommended average prison sentence by 10 to 55%. We develop a conceptual framework that decomposes the effect of quantity thresholds into two opposing effects: the severity and the reference effects. We provide suggestive evidence for the existence of severity and reference effects. Using new parametric measures of ordinal (in)justice, we further quantify the effect of thresholds on the probability of an ordinally just sentence for a given level of tolerance.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusions</h3><p>Quantity thresholds, designed to limit sentencing disparities, introduce a different source of disparity which might substantially limit the net benefits of such provisions</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Preregistration</h3><p>AEARCTR-0006023</p>","PeriodicalId":47684,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Criminology","volume":"94 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-023-09568-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

We study the effects of quantity thresholds (such as drug amount) used to divide offenses into subsections on sentencing decisions by professional sentencers

Methods

In a vignette experiment, 200 Czech prosecutors recommended a length of prison sentence in drug possession and theft cases

Results

We provide experimental evidence that quantity thresholds increase the recommended average prison sentence by 10 to 55%. We develop a conceptual framework that decomposes the effect of quantity thresholds into two opposing effects: the severity and the reference effects. We provide suggestive evidence for the existence of severity and reference effects. Using new parametric measures of ordinal (in)justice, we further quantify the effect of thresholds on the probability of an ordinally just sentence for a given level of tolerance.

Conclusions

Quantity thresholds, designed to limit sentencing disparities, introduce a different source of disparity which might substantially limit the net benefits of such provisions

Preregistration

AEARCTR-0006023

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

量刑阈值:理论与实验

方法在一项小实验中，对200名捷克检察官在毒品持有和盗窃案件中推荐的刑期进行了实验研究。结果我们提供的实验证据表明，数量阈值使推荐的平均刑期增加了10%至55%。我们开发了一个概念框架，将数量阈值的影响分解为两种相反的影响:严重性效应和参考效应。我们为严重性和参考效应的存在提供了暗示性证据。使用有序正义的新参数度量，我们进一步量化了给定容忍度水平下阈值对有序正义判决概率的影响。旨在限制量刑差异的数量阈值引入了不同的差异来源，这可能会大大限制此类规定的净效益

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Experimental Criminology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-

CiteScore

6.20

自引率

6.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Experimental Criminology focuses on high quality experimental and quasi-experimental research in the advancement of criminological theory and/or the development of evidence based crime and justice policy. The journal is also committed to the advancement of the science of systematic reviews and experimental methods in criminology and criminal justice. The journal seeks empirical papers on experimental and quasi-experimental studies, systematic reviews on substantive criminological and criminal justice issues, and methodological papers on experimentation and systematic review. The journal encourages submissions from scholars in the broad array of scientific disciplines that are concerned with criminology as well as crime and justice problems.