Public Support for Incarceration Declines With Exposure to Evidence That Prison Increases Reoffending.

IF 1.9 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW
Caelan Alexander-Nordstrom, Daniel Brady, Corey Hill Allen, Eyal Aharoni
{"title":"Public Support for Incarceration Declines With Exposure to Evidence That Prison Increases Reoffending.","authors":"Caelan Alexander-Nordstrom, Daniel Brady, Corey Hill Allen, Eyal Aharoni","doi":"10.1002/bsl.70091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>How might public sentiment respond to information that incarceration may not always achieve one of its core goals of deterring crime or that it could even, perversely, increase reoffending? Across three experiments, participants provided prison sentence length recommendations for a violent or nonviolent criminal case vignette. Before doing so, they were randomized to view either criminogenic evidence (incarceration increases reoffending), deterrent evidence (incarceration decreases reoffending), \"no-effect\" evidence (incarceration has no effect on reoffending), or no evidence at all. We predicted and found that participants exposed to criminogenic evidence recommended significantly shorter (up to one-third shorter) prison sentences than those exposed to deterrent evidence. Our predictions regarding the \"no-effect\" and \"no evidence\" conditions were partially supported. This pattern of results demonstrates clear public support for reducing criminogenic consequences of incarceration, but this support may be qualified by other competing punishment motivations. These findings suggest how information campaigns could play a role in altering public sentiment toward criminal justice policies.</p>","PeriodicalId":47926,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.70091","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

How might public sentiment respond to information that incarceration may not always achieve one of its core goals of deterring crime or that it could even, perversely, increase reoffending? Across three experiments, participants provided prison sentence length recommendations for a violent or nonviolent criminal case vignette. Before doing so, they were randomized to view either criminogenic evidence (incarceration increases reoffending), deterrent evidence (incarceration decreases reoffending), "no-effect" evidence (incarceration has no effect on reoffending), or no evidence at all. We predicted and found that participants exposed to criminogenic evidence recommended significantly shorter (up to one-third shorter) prison sentences than those exposed to deterrent evidence. Our predictions regarding the "no-effect" and "no evidence" conditions were partially supported. This pattern of results demonstrates clear public support for reducing criminogenic consequences of incarceration, but this support may be qualified by other competing punishment motivations. These findings suggest how information campaigns could play a role in altering public sentiment toward criminal justice policies.

公众对监禁的支持随着监狱增加再犯的证据而下降。
如果得知监禁可能并不总能达到威慑犯罪的核心目标之一,甚至可能反常地增加再犯罪率,公众情绪会作何反应?在三个实验中,参与者为暴力或非暴力刑事案件的小插图提供了刑期建议。在此之前,他们被随机分配到犯罪证据(监禁增加再犯),威慑证据(监禁减少再犯),“无效”证据(监禁对再犯没有影响),或者根本没有证据。我们预测并发现,接触犯罪证据的参与者比接触威慑证据的参与者建议的刑期明显缩短(最多缩短三分之一)。我们关于“无影响”和“无证据”条件的预测得到了部分支持。这种结果模式表明公众明确支持减少监禁的犯罪后果,但这种支持可能受到其他竞争性惩罚动机的限制。这些发现表明,宣传活动如何在改变公众对刑事司法政策的看法方面发挥作用。
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
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
50
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书