Belief about immutability of moral character and punitiveness toward criminal offenders

Abstract

The present research examined the association between belief about immutability of moral character and punitiveness toward criminal offenders. Overall, participants who believed that moral character is immutable (entity theorists) were more punitive than those who believed that it is changeable (incremental theorists). More important, the present research identified two mediational paths: Entity theorists made more internal attribution of criminal behavior and held stronger expectation of offenders' recidivism, both of which in turn led to stronger punitiveness. Also, contrary to some researchers' speculation, entity theorists did not perceive less controllability in criminal behavior. Implications for implicit theory research and criminal justice research are discussed."I think capital punishment works great. Every killer you kill never kills again."This quote may be just a comic statement by American stand-up comedian Bill Maher, but it hints at the possibility that people's belief about immutability of criminality or moral character is associated with their punitiveness toward criminal offenders. The first objective of the present research was to empirically demonstrate this association. The second, more important objective was to examine the mediating mechanisms underlying this association. Belief about immutability of moral character and punitivenessbs_bs_banner

Public Opinion on Criminal Records and Employment: A Test of Competing Theoretical Models

“…Similarly, if one holds the view that human nature is malleable, then one might also believe that work can act as a catalyst for personal change or redemption for people with criminal records, thereby reducing the likelihood of reoffending. This latter finding corresponds closely with prior work on punitive sentiments (Maruna & King, 2009; Tam et al, 2013) as well as support for reentry policies (Ouellette et al, 2017), and it indicates that opposition to criminal record use in hiring decisions is guided in large part by instrumental and utilitarian concerns.…”

“…Furthermore, interpersonal contact and increased personal familiarity with individuals who have criminal records may mitigate such stigmatizing attitudes (LeBel, 2008; Rade et al, 2018). Finally, scholars have noted that a belief in personal malleability is an instrumental factor that reduces the perceived level of recidivism risk attending release from prison and, as a result, is negatively associated with punitiveness (Maruna & King, 2009; Tam, Shu, Ng, & Tong, 2013; Unnever & Cullen, 2009).…”

Belief in Redeemability and Punitive Public Opinion: “Once a Criminal, Always a Criminal” Revisited

“…Before presenting the analysis, two important considerations merit discussion. First, a key assumption of the now-voluminous research on attribution theory and studies of redeemability/immutability/growth mindset is that beliefs about people who committed offenses and their capacity to change are “antecedents of punitiveness” and other correctional policies (Tam et al, 2013, p. 603; see also Plaks et al, 2009). The underlying theory is that views of such individuals—in this case, as capable of being reformed—provide the logic or rational basis for policies (such as providing them with opportunities to change).…”

The Dark Side of Malleability: Incremental Theory Promotes Immoral Behaviors

“…For instance, incremental theorists made fewer negative evaluations, showed more empathy, and recommended less punishment to an immoral target ( Erdley and Dweck, 1993 ; Gervey et al, 1999 ), because they believed that human actions were dynamic and malleable, and thus the problem behaviors could be educated or reformed ( Kammrath and Peetz, 2012 ). By contrast, entity theorists had a greater tendency to support rigid punishment and to show more negative attitudes toward moral transgressions ( Chiu et al, 1997a ; Miller et al, 2007 ; Tam et al, 2013 ), because they believed that traits were fixed and essential, and thus those who had once offended moral principles were very likely to recidivate ( Tam et al, 2013 ; Williams, 2015 ). Furthermore, incremental theorists were more likely to forgive and trust after an apology than entity theorists ( Haselhuhn et al, 2010 ).…”

“…Previous studies referring to implicit theories of morality shed light on how individuals’ implicit beliefs influence their attitudes toward and judgments of other people, such as punishments for criminals ( Tam et al, 2013 ) and forgiveness for an immoral target ( Haselhuhn et al, 2010 ). However, very little attention has been paid to how implicit theories shape one’s own moral decisions.…”