{"title":"政策中的政治:关于通过第二次机会机制减刑的公众观点的实验研究。","authors":"Isabella Polito,Colleen M Berryessa","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\r\nThis research examined how the cost of incarceration to the state and type of offense affect public support for different levels of sentence reductions (10%, 25%, 50%) via policies called \"second chance\" mechanisms that reduce incarcerated populations as well as whether political ideology or affiliation predicts such support.\r\n\r\nHYPOTHESES\r\n(a) Across different levels of sentence reductions, participants were expected to show significantly decreased support for the use of second chance mechanisms for violent compared with nonviolent crimes (b) but also to show significantly increased support when exposed to cost information to the state, compared with not receiving that information. (c) Political ideology and affiliation were expected to moderate support across different levels of sentence reductions.\r\n\r\nMETHOD\r\nA 6 (offense type) × 2 (cost of incarceration to the state) experiment with a national sample of the U.S. public (N = 419) was used to assess support for using second chance mechanisms to achieve different levels of sentence reductions. Moderation analyses assessed how participants' political ideology and affiliation impacted support.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nParticipants did not show significantly less support for the use of second chance mechanisms to achieve sentence reductions for violent compared with nonviolent crimes. Providing cost information did not significantly impact support for any level of sentence reduction. Across sentence reductions, political ideology significantly moderated support for the use of second chance mechanisms; being more conservative predicted decreased support for a 10% sentence reduction when cost information was also provided.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nCrime type and political ideology, but not fiscal costs, appear in some way to bear on public support for sentence reductions via second chance mechanisms. Overall, evidence suggests that public support for the use of second chance mechanisms presents an opportunity to advance reforms that reduce incarcerated populations and enhance the public's perceptions of the justice system's legitimacy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Politics in policy: An experimental examination of public views regarding sentence reductions via second chance mechanisms.\",\"authors\":\"Isabella Polito,Colleen M Berryessa\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/lhb0000605\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"OBJECTIVE\\r\\nThis research examined how the cost of incarceration to the state and type of offense affect public support for different levels of sentence reductions (10%, 25%, 50%) via policies called \\\"second chance\\\" mechanisms that reduce incarcerated populations as well as whether political ideology or affiliation predicts such support.\\r\\n\\r\\nHYPOTHESES\\r\\n(a) Across different levels of sentence reductions, participants were expected to show significantly decreased support for the use of second chance mechanisms for violent compared with nonviolent crimes (b) but also to show significantly increased support when exposed to cost information to the state, compared with not receiving that information. (c) Political ideology and affiliation were expected to moderate support across different levels of sentence reductions.\\r\\n\\r\\nMETHOD\\r\\nA 6 (offense type) × 2 (cost of incarceration to the state) experiment with a national sample of the U.S. public (N = 419) was used to assess support for using second chance mechanisms to achieve different levels of sentence reductions. Moderation analyses assessed how participants' political ideology and affiliation impacted support.\\r\\n\\r\\nRESULTS\\r\\nParticipants did not show significantly less support for the use of second chance mechanisms to achieve sentence reductions for violent compared with nonviolent crimes. Providing cost information did not significantly impact support for any level of sentence reduction. Across sentence reductions, political ideology significantly moderated support for the use of second chance mechanisms; being more conservative predicted decreased support for a 10% sentence reduction when cost information was also provided.\\r\\n\\r\\nCONCLUSIONS\\r\\nCrime type and political ideology, but not fiscal costs, appear in some way to bear on public support for sentence reductions via second chance mechanisms. Overall, evidence suggests that public support for the use of second chance mechanisms presents an opportunity to advance reforms that reduce incarcerated populations and enhance the public's perceptions of the justice system's legitimacy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).\",\"PeriodicalId\":48230,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law and Human Behavior\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law and Human Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000605\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Human Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000605","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究考察了国家监禁成本和犯罪类型如何影响公众对不同减刑水平(10%、25%和50%)的支持,通过所谓的“第二次机会”机制来减少被监禁人口,以及政治意识形态或隶属关系是否预测了这种支持。与非暴力犯罪相比,预期参与者对暴力犯罪使用第二次机会机制的支持明显减少(b),但与未获得该信息相比,当向国家提供成本信息时,预期参与者对该机制的支持也明显增加。(c)预期政治意识形态和从属关系会缓和不同减刑级别的支持。方法采用6(犯罪类型)× 2(国家监禁成本)实验,以美国公众为样本(N = 419),评估使用第二次机会机制实现不同程度减刑的支持度。适度分析评估了参与者的政治意识形态和从属关系如何影响支持度。结果与非暴力犯罪相比,参与者对使用第二次机会机制实现暴力犯罪减刑的支持并没有明显减少。提供成本信息并没有显著影响对任何减刑级别的支持。在减刑过程中,政治意识形态显著调节了对使用第二次机会机制的支持;当提供成本信息时,更保守的人预测减刑10%的支持率会下降。结论犯罪类型和政治意识形态在一定程度上影响公众对通过第二次机会机制减刑的支持,而财政成本不影响。总体而言,有证据表明,公众对使用第二次机会机制的支持为推进改革提供了机会,从而减少被监禁人口,增强公众对司法系统合法性的认识。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
Politics in policy: An experimental examination of public views regarding sentence reductions via second chance mechanisms.
OBJECTIVE
This research examined how the cost of incarceration to the state and type of offense affect public support for different levels of sentence reductions (10%, 25%, 50%) via policies called "second chance" mechanisms that reduce incarcerated populations as well as whether political ideology or affiliation predicts such support.
HYPOTHESES
(a) Across different levels of sentence reductions, participants were expected to show significantly decreased support for the use of second chance mechanisms for violent compared with nonviolent crimes (b) but also to show significantly increased support when exposed to cost information to the state, compared with not receiving that information. (c) Political ideology and affiliation were expected to moderate support across different levels of sentence reductions.
METHOD
A 6 (offense type) × 2 (cost of incarceration to the state) experiment with a national sample of the U.S. public (N = 419) was used to assess support for using second chance mechanisms to achieve different levels of sentence reductions. Moderation analyses assessed how participants' political ideology and affiliation impacted support.
RESULTS
Participants did not show significantly less support for the use of second chance mechanisms to achieve sentence reductions for violent compared with nonviolent crimes. Providing cost information did not significantly impact support for any level of sentence reduction. Across sentence reductions, political ideology significantly moderated support for the use of second chance mechanisms; being more conservative predicted decreased support for a 10% sentence reduction when cost information was also provided.
CONCLUSIONS
Crime type and political ideology, but not fiscal costs, appear in some way to bear on public support for sentence reductions via second chance mechanisms. Overall, evidence suggests that public support for the use of second chance mechanisms presents an opportunity to advance reforms that reduce incarcerated populations and enhance the public's perceptions of the justice system's legitimacy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
Law and Human Behavior, the official journal of the American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association, is a multidisciplinary forum for the publication of articles and discussions of issues arising out of the relationships between human behavior and the law, our legal system, and the legal process. This journal publishes original research, reviews of past research, and theoretical studies from professionals in criminal justice, law, psychology, sociology, psychiatry, political science, education, communication, and other areas germane to the field.