Should police officers who use force against peaceful protesters be punished? A national experiment

IF 1.8 2区 社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Andrew J. Thompson, Christi Metcalfe, Justin T. Pickett
{"title":"Should police officers who use force against peaceful protesters be punished? A national experiment","authors":"Andrew J. Thompson, Christi Metcalfe, Justin T. Pickett","doi":"10.1007/s11292-023-09589-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Objectives</h3><p>In a period of mass protest, police use of force against protesters regularly makes headlines across the country. Our study contributes to the literature on public opinion about protest policing by examining support for punishing officers who use force against peaceful protesters.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>We used a factorial survey experiment administered by YouGov (<i>N</i> = 1000), wherein an officer used force against a peaceful protester. We randomized the type of force, the protest goal, and protester characteristics (race, sex, and age)—factors relevant to theories of retributive intuitions (just-deserts) and group threat. We also included political beliefs and racial resentment as observational predictors. Respondents rated the moral acceptability of force and the officer’s deservingness of punishment.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>Respondents evaluated the use of force against peaceful protesters as morally wrong and deserving of punishment. Except for protester age, the experimental manipulations did not affect evaluations of police use of force. However, there was a sizable political divide in use-of-force evaluations, which was mediated by racial animus.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusions</h3><p>When it comes to public evaluations of police behavior toward peaceful protesters, what matters more than situational details (e.g., protest goals, protester demographics) is the evaluators’ political and racial attitudes. Americans on the political right are less willing to punish police misbehavior because they are more racially resentful.</p>","PeriodicalId":47684,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Criminology","volume":"115 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-13","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/s11292-023-09589-3","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

In a period of mass protest, police use of force against protesters regularly makes headlines across the country. Our study contributes to the literature on public opinion about protest policing by examining support for punishing officers who use force against peaceful protesters.

Methods

We used a factorial survey experiment administered by YouGov (N = 1000), wherein an officer used force against a peaceful protester. We randomized the type of force, the protest goal, and protester characteristics (race, sex, and age)—factors relevant to theories of retributive intuitions (just-deserts) and group threat. We also included political beliefs and racial resentment as observational predictors. Respondents rated the moral acceptability of force and the officer’s deservingness of punishment.

Results

Respondents evaluated the use of force against peaceful protesters as morally wrong and deserving of punishment. Except for protester age, the experimental manipulations did not affect evaluations of police use of force. However, there was a sizable political divide in use-of-force evaluations, which was mediated by racial animus.

Conclusions

When it comes to public evaluations of police behavior toward peaceful protesters, what matters more than situational details (e.g., protest goals, protester demographics) is the evaluators’ political and racial attitudes. Americans on the political right are less willing to punish police misbehavior because they are more racially resentful.

Abstract Image

对和平抗议者使用武力的警察应该受到惩罚吗?全国性实验
目的在大规模抗议期间,警察对抗议者使用武力经常成为全国的头条新闻。我们的研究通过调查对惩罚对和平抗议者使用武力的警察的支持,为有关抗议警察的舆论文献做出了贡献。方法采用YouGov(N = 1000),其中一名警察对一名和平抗议者使用武力。我们随机选择了武力类型、抗议目标和抗议者特征(种族、性别和年龄)——这些因素与报复直觉(只是沙漠)和群体威胁理论有关。我们还将政治信仰和种族怨恨作为观察预测因素。受访者评价了武力在道德上的可接受性和军官对惩罚的应得性。结果受访者认为对和平抗议者使用武力在道德上是错误的,应该受到惩罚。除了抗议者年龄外,实验操作并不影响对警察使用武力的评估。然而,在使用武力的评估方面存在相当大的政治分歧,这是由种族仇恨所调解的。结论当涉及到对警察对和平抗议者行为的公开评估时,比情境细节(例如,抗议目标、抗议者人口统计)更重要的是评估者的政治和种族态度。政治右翼的美国人不太愿意惩罚警察的不当行为,因为他们更具种族仇恨。
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
Journal of Experimental Criminology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
49
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.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信