Using data from the 2012 AmericasBarometer survey collected in nine Latin American countries ( n =  14,705), this study examines two theoretically relevant potential sources of punitiveness: economic anxiety and fear of crime. Focusing on these two sources, we explore whether the public opinion dynamics often highlighted by punitiveness scholars also apply to the Latin American context and can thus be of value to explain recent movements towards punitive policies in that region. Generalized Structural Equation Modeling (GSEM) and bootstrapping are used to assess the direct effects of perceived national and personal economic insecurity on punitive sentiments as well as the indirect effects of these attitudes on punitiveness through fear of crime during a time of reduced economic growth, increased economic inequality, and harsh criminal justice policies. Results show that economic anxieties are positively associated with fear of crime, though their effects on support for increased punishments are mixed. Additionally, the effects of economic insecurity on punitiveness are partially mediated by fear of crime, supporting theoretical notions that insecurity produces fear of crime and subsequently influences punitiveness.

Prior studies demonstrate that victimization and fear of crime independently affect criminal justice attitudes, but few have examined trust in criminal justice institutions. In addition, research has been primarily confined to the United States. Using data from the AmericasBarometer survey collected in the United States, Mexico, Argentina, and Brazil, the current study investigates the direct and indirect effects of criminal victimization and fear of crime on (a) perceived fairness of the courts, (b) trust in the police, and (c) overall trust in the criminal justice system. Results show that while the direct effects of victimization are mixed across countries and outcomes, fear of crime consistently mediates the effects of victimization on trust in criminal justice institutions.

No abstract

The social threat perspective anticipates that members of racial/ethnic out-groups might be perceived as socially, politically, or economically threatening; criminally inclined; and in need of social control via the criminal justice system. In light of this framework, the current study examines the influence of out-group animus on punitive sentiments in the rarely explored context of Latin America. Data from the 2012 AmericasBarometer survey collected in nine countries ( N = 15,145) are analyzed, and the findings indicate that animus against foreigners, Blacks, and the Indigenous is positively associated with support for punitive measures. These results lend support for the social threat perspective and provide further evidence that this relationship might be a cultural universal in societies characterized by racial/ethnic conflict.

The group threat perspective has been tested with regard to a variety of social control outcomes, including public support for punitive crime control policies. However, little work has explored possible interactive effects between macro-level racial/ethnic contexts, individual-level racial/ethnic animus, and race/ethnicity on punitive attitudes, and none of this research has been conducted outside the United States. The current study is the first to examine these interrelationships in Latin America, which is characterized by notable racial/ethnic stratification and recent movements toward authoritarian criminal justice strategies. Analyses of data from the AmericasBarometer survey collected in 633 municipalities within 10 countries ( N = 16,782) reveal that (1) racial/ethnic animus is consistently predictive of support for harsher punishments, (2) the effect of being White on punitiveness is conditioned by Indigenous population size at the municipal level, and (3) the interactive effects of being White and holding anti-Black animus are further moderated by municipal-level percent Black/Mulatto.