对科学的怀疑和惩罚态度

IF 3.3 1区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Jason Rydberg, Luke DeZago
{"title":"对科学的怀疑和惩罚态度","authors":"Jason Rydberg,&nbsp;Luke DeZago","doi":"10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2025.102422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study examines whether there is an association between skepticism in science and punitive attitudes, including temporal dynamics and potential for unobserved confounding. Drawing on data from the General Social Survey (GSS) repeated cross-sections (1972–2018) (<em>N</em> = 26,652) and 2006–2010 3-wave panels (<em>N</em> = 5807), study objectives were addressed using Bayesian hierarchical age-period-cohort characteristics (HAPC) and hybrid parameterized mixed effect panel logit regression models. Findings suggest that respondents who express skepticism in science are more likely to endorse harsher punishments from courts and a reduction in funding for drug rehabilitation, after controlling for relevant theoretical and empirical controls. This association increases in magnitude across respondent ages, and has been relatively stable over time. Though respondents more likely to be skeptical in science are also more punitive, the association may be partially spurious, potentially reflecting common underlying factors, rather than through a direct causal pathway. The findings underline the challenges in developing consensus on criminal justice policy reform through appeals to evidence-based practices.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48272,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminal Justice","volume":"98 ","pages":"Article 102422"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Skepticism in science and punitive attitudes\",\"authors\":\"Jason Rydberg,&nbsp;Luke DeZago\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2025.102422\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This study examines whether there is an association between skepticism in science and punitive attitudes, including temporal dynamics and potential for unobserved confounding. Drawing on data from the General Social Survey (GSS) repeated cross-sections (1972–2018) (<em>N</em> = 26,652) and 2006–2010 3-wave panels (<em>N</em> = 5807), study objectives were addressed using Bayesian hierarchical age-period-cohort characteristics (HAPC) and hybrid parameterized mixed effect panel logit regression models. Findings suggest that respondents who express skepticism in science are more likely to endorse harsher punishments from courts and a reduction in funding for drug rehabilitation, after controlling for relevant theoretical and empirical controls. This association increases in magnitude across respondent ages, and has been relatively stable over time. Though respondents more likely to be skeptical in science are also more punitive, the association may be partially spurious, potentially reflecting common underlying factors, rather than through a direct causal pathway. The findings underline the challenges in developing consensus on criminal justice policy reform through appeals to evidence-based practices.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48272,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Criminal Justice\",\"volume\":\"98 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102422\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Criminal Justice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047235225000716\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Criminal Justice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047235225000716","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究考察了科学怀疑主义与惩罚态度之间是否存在关联,包括时间动态和潜在的未观察到的混淆。利用综合社会调查(GSS)重复横截面(1972-2018年)(N = 26,652)和2006-2010年三波面板(N = 5807)的数据,使用贝叶斯分层年龄-时期-队列特征(HAPC)和混合参数化混合效应面板logit回归模型来解决研究目标。调查结果表明,在控制了相关的理论和实证控制之后,对科学表示怀疑的受访者更有可能支持法院更严厉的惩罚和减少对戒毒的资助。这种关联随着受访者年龄的增长而增加,并且随着时间的推移相对稳定。尽管受访者更有可能对科学持怀疑态度,也更有惩罚性,但这种联系可能部分是虚假的,可能反映了共同的潜在因素,而不是通过直接的因果途径。调查结果强调了通过呼吁以证据为基础的做法就刑事司法政策改革达成共识所面临的挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Skepticism in science and punitive attitudes
This study examines whether there is an association between skepticism in science and punitive attitudes, including temporal dynamics and potential for unobserved confounding. Drawing on data from the General Social Survey (GSS) repeated cross-sections (1972–2018) (N = 26,652) and 2006–2010 3-wave panels (N = 5807), study objectives were addressed using Bayesian hierarchical age-period-cohort characteristics (HAPC) and hybrid parameterized mixed effect panel logit regression models. Findings suggest that respondents who express skepticism in science are more likely to endorse harsher punishments from courts and a reduction in funding for drug rehabilitation, after controlling for relevant theoretical and empirical controls. This association increases in magnitude across respondent ages, and has been relatively stable over time. Though respondents more likely to be skeptical in science are also more punitive, the association may be partially spurious, potentially reflecting common underlying factors, rather than through a direct causal pathway. The findings underline the challenges in developing consensus on criminal justice policy reform through appeals to evidence-based practices.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Criminal Justice
Journal of Criminal Justice CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
93
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Criminal Justice is an international journal intended to fill the present need for the dissemination of new information, ideas and methods, to both practitioners and academicians in the criminal justice area. The Journal is concerned with all aspects of the criminal justice system in terms of their relationships to each other. Although materials are presented relating to crime and the individual elements of the criminal justice system, the emphasis of the Journal is to tie together the functioning of these elements and to illustrate the effects of their interactions. Articles that reflect the application of new disciplines or analytical methodologies to the problems of criminal justice are of special interest. Since the purpose of the Journal is to provide a forum for the dissemination of new ideas, new information, and the application of new methods to the problems and functions of the criminal justice system, the Journal emphasizes innovation and creative thought of the highest quality.
×
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