Further Explorations in the Scaling of Penalties

Sebba, Leslie; Nathan, Gad

doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a047451

Cited by 30 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Some subjects experienced difficulty with the hierarchical order of the scale and with the actual penalty structures. Although Sparks (1971)supported placing penalties in ascending order of seriousness, the question of how to present penalties to naive subjects is hotly debated (Freiberg and Fox, 1987).In defence of our ascending scale, a study in which magistrates were asked to place penalties in ascending order of severity produced a hierarchy comparable to that used in the present study (Karpadis and Farington, 1981),as did a study of community perceptions of the relative severity of sentences (Sebba and Nathan, 1984). The naivety of our subjects to courtroom penalties can be seen in some of the comments added to the questionnaires: "I don't consider community work to be a harsh penalty.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

Greedy, Needy, or Troubled? High School and University Students' Natural and Induced Views of Shopstealers

Lawrence¹,

Hore

1993

Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adolescents and wUversily studentsprocessed comprehension packages designed to inducethem to adopt schemas for categorising shoplifters as either "greedy", "needy" or "troubled" persons. Adolescents'subsequentviews ofshoplifters, measured on a Shop Stealing Altitude Questionnaire (SSAQ) were related to schema conditions in expectedways, demonstrating the influence of the comprehension packages. Subjects who processed the package claiming that shopstealers are greedy displayed tougher attitudes to shopstealers, with highermean Greed and Condemn Scale scores. Subjects who processedpac/cQges claiming that shopstealers are eitherneedy or troubled displayed more lenientattitudeswith higher Need and Troubled Scale Scores. Younger adolescents showed harsher views, while older adolescents and all females were more understanding of offenders' circumstances and motives. Schema inducing comprehension packages, subjects'ages, and SSAQ measured views were weakly predictive of penalties assigned to offenders in sample cases. Findings supportgeneraltrendsofyoungeradolescents'punitiveness in relation to a specific offence, but indicatethe difficulties ofinexperienced penalisers in assigning penalties.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 58%

Greedy, Needy, or Troubled? High School and University Students' Natural and Induced Views of Shopstealers

Lawrence¹,

Hore

1993

Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Une analyse des propriétés structurelles des peines basée sur les échelles de sévérité pénale d'un échantillon représentatif de la société civile montréalaise aboutit aux mêmes résultats (Tremblay, 1987). Les résultats obtenus par Sebba et Nathan (1984) ou McClelland et Alpert (1985), à partir d'échantillons très différents (étu-diants, policiers, détenus), témoignent également de la robustesse de cette typologie.…”

Section: Les Propriétés Structurelles Des Peinesunclassified

“…L'ensemble de ces correspondances constitue l'objet d'étude de ce qu'on pourrait appeler la «métrique pénale». Un certain nombre de techniques ont été mises au point pour mesurer la sévérité perçue des peines que les tribunaux infligent aux délinquants pour les crimes qu'ils ont commis (Sebba, 1978;Erickson et Gibbs, 1979;Buchner, 1979;Sebba et Nathan, 1984;McClelland et Alpert, 1985;Allen et Benson, 1985).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Équivalences pénales et solutions de rechange à l’emprisonnement : la métrique pénale implicite des tribunaux criminels

Tremblay¹,

Gravel²,

Cusson³

2005

crimino

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sentencing research has generally neglected taking into account how perceptions of the severity of available sanctions affect sentencing behavior. Based on the magnitude estimates of just how severe penalties of different kinds and different amounts criminal courts perceive them to be, this paper identifies the current exchange rates on what Wilkins has called the “punishment market” explains why so many alternatives to imprisonment experiments have backfired, offers a justification for the existing penal repertoire and finds criminal court's severity scales to be socially well grounded.

show abstract

“…Sebba, 1978). However, some attention has been devoted in recent years to the possibilities of unidimen sionable scaling of this variable (see Erickson and Gibbs, 1979;Sebba and Nathan, 1984). Perhaps because of these methodological difficulties, the findings of the studies have not been unequivocal regarding the impact of victim harm.…”

Section: The Victim and The Sentencing Judgementioning

confidence: 99%

Third parties: victims and the criminal justice system

Sebba¹

1997

Choice Reviews Online

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Further Explorations in the Scaling of Penalties

Cited by 30 publications

References 0 publications

Greedy, Needy, or Troubled? High School and University Students' Natural and Induced Views of Shopstealers

Greedy, Needy, or Troubled? High School and University Students' Natural and Induced Views of Shopstealers

Équivalences pénales et solutions de rechange à l’emprisonnement : la métrique pénale implicite des tribunaux criminels

Third parties: victims and the criminal justice system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About