“Knowledge and Death Penalty Opinion: The Marshall Hypotheses Revisited.”

Lee, Gavin M.; Böhm, Robert; Pazzani, Lynn

doi:10.1007/s12103-013-9229-z

Cited by 16 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There has in fact been some research partially substantiating the Marshall Hypothesis, although the literature is mixed. Effects are often small and, importantly for the present article, support for the death penalty in the interest of retributive justice can be resilient even when subjects are exposed to greater information about the American death penalty’s realities (Bohm et al., 1991; Lambert et al., 2011; Lambert and Clarke, 2001; Lee et al., 2014; Mitchell, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Comparing expert versus general public rationale for death penalty support and opposition: Is expert perspective on capital punishment consistent with “disciplined retention”?

Griffin

2021

Punishment & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The author compared American criminologists’ stated reasons for death penalty support or opposition with those of the general public as reported by Gallup pollsters. While experts were overwhelmingly more likely to oppose capital punishment, the rationale for opposition or support were largely comparable for both groups, albeit with some potentially informative differences. As is the case with the general public, the most common reasons for experts' opposition are moral beliefs, concerns about system errors, and the unfair application of the death penalty. Similarly, among the small minority of experts who expressed (often qualified) support for the death penalty, the favored rationale is simple retributive justice—exactly as is the case with the general public. The results show that, not only is opposition to the death penalty among experts not absolute, but the underlying rationale of expert dissenters is arguably a partial bridge to greater public-expert symbiosis on this highly contentious and divisive issue. The radical “newsmaking criminology” contribution of these findings and their ramifications is that the entirety of expert perspective is arguably as consistent with disciplined retention of the death penalty as it is with strict abolition. Future research could reveal even more expert sympathy for retributive thinking, and thus greater affinity with public views, than might be assumed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Comparing expert versus general public rationale for death penalty support and opposition: Is expert perspective on capital punishment consistent with “disciplined retention”?

Griffin

2021

Punishment & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The study could not test the Marshall Hypothesis and see if public support for the death penalty was influenced by one’s lack of knowledge about the subject, as studies conducted in United States have often found (cf. Bohm et al., 1993; Bohm and Vogel, 2004; Lee et al., 2014). According to Johnson (2006: 269), “abolitionists in Japan believe more citizens would resist the death penalty if they knew more about it.” Yet, a pre-test/post-test experiment conducted in Japan in 2014 showed that participation in a two-day workshop meant to increase one’s knowledge about the death penalty did not have the anticipated outcome.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public opinion and the death penalty in Japan

Andreescu

Hughes

2020

Punishment & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on the Japanese General Social Survey conducted in 2010 on a representative sample of adults, the present analysis intends to identify the factors more likely to predict variations in death penalty attitudes in Japan. Compared to death penalty proponents, those who oppose capital punishment are less likely to express punitive attitudes in general and to be dissatisfied with government expenditures on crime control. Relative to retentionists, abolitionists tend to have a higher level of social trust, show a higher level of support for public participation in the criminal justice process, are more likely to practice a religion, and are younger. Instrumental factors, such as victimization and fear of crime, symbolic factors, such as institutional trust, trust in the judiciary, and the police, as well as gender do not differentiate death penalty opponents from supporters. The results of the multinomial logistic regression show that residents who did not express agreement or disagreement with the death penalty have more in common with those who oppose capital punishment than with those who favor it. Although the majority of the population (65.2%) expressed support for death penalty, one in four respondents (26.1%) remained ambivalent regarding the use of capital punishment. Additionally, most of those who expressed an opinion (50.5%) said they would hesitate to recommend death, if chosen to serve in the newly instituted citizen judge system. Findings suggest that public support for death penalty is not as strong in the country as the Japanese government claims and that it requires further exploration.

show abstract

“…At the end of the semester, the same survey or post-test was distributed to determine if opinions had changed over time. The survey was adopted from Lee et al (2014) and is summarized on pages 650 to 651. It should be noted that the primary author and course instructor made extraordinary efforts to not reveal their position on capital punishment.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The primary dependent variable in the study is opposition to the death penalty. This was measured using Lee et al’s (2014) death penalty opinion items (pp. 650–651).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Specific Knowledge on Death Penalty Opposition: An Empirical Test of the Marshall Hypothesis

Harmon

Falco

Taylor

2021

Crime & Delinquency

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As we approach the 50-year anniversary of the landmark Furman decision, the time is ripe for a renewed empirical test of the hypotheses Justice Marshall presented in his concurring opinion. Most relevant to this study, he suggested in his second proposition that “people who were fully informed as to the purposes of the penalty and its liabilities would find the penalty, shocking, unjust and unacceptable.” While there has been much empirical testing of this hypothesis, the intent of this study is to add to the existing literature by examining whether specific types of information about capital punishment is associated with opposition to capital punishment. Data were collected by an instructor who taught death penalty classes ( n = 122 subjects) to test this hypothesis. Results provide qualified support for Marshall’s second hypothesis that knowledge is significantly related to an increase in death penalty opposition. Moreover, the following factors were significant predictors of overall change in participants’ opinion: cost, deterrence, race of victim, and evolving societies. Surprisingly, the innocence items did not appear statistically significant in altering opinions. Future research should continue to explore further aspects of the Marshall hypothesis such as the effect of different methods of information delivery.

show abstract

“Knowledge and Death Penalty Opinion: The Marshall Hypotheses Revisited.”

Cited by 16 publications

References 19 publications

Comparing expert versus general public rationale for death penalty support and opposition: Is expert perspective on capital punishment consistent with “disciplined retention”?

Comparing expert versus general public rationale for death penalty support and opposition: Is expert perspective on capital punishment consistent with “disciplined retention”?

Public opinion and the death penalty in Japan

The Impact of Specific Knowledge on Death Penalty Opposition: An Empirical Test of the Marshall Hypothesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About