2001
DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2001.tb02112.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Putting Severity of Punishment Back in the Deterrence Package

Abstract: Studies of criminal deterrence usually show an effect of certainty of punishment but often fail to find an effect of the severity. This is a serious threat to the theoretical underpinnings of deterrence theory. Through both a survey of 39 analyses in 33 published studies and our own reanalysis of an often‐used data set, we show the problem rests not with the theory but with the analysis of the theory. Finding no severity effect can be traced to “unbundling the theoretical package” when moving from the theory t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
30
0
5

Year Published

2008
2008
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 56 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
2
30
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…of police, public prosecution, court decision and kind of imprisonment. This comprehensive coverage avoids any misspecification due to missing variables, a problem put forward by Mendes and McDonald (2001), and Mustard (2003). Conviction rates and time served are theoretically important, but rarely used.…”
Section: Econometric Modeling and Methodological Aspectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…of police, public prosecution, court decision and kind of imprisonment. This comprehensive coverage avoids any misspecification due to missing variables, a problem put forward by Mendes and McDonald (2001), and Mustard (2003). Conviction rates and time served are theoretically important, but rarely used.…”
Section: Econometric Modeling and Methodological Aspectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As the Criminal Law Reform entailed changes away from short-term custodial sanctions, also the average length of prison sentences should be focused on when calculating the expected costs of committing a crime. As Mendes and McDonald (2001) and Mustard (2003) argue convincingly, components of general deterrence do not work independently of each other.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…hvort stefnumótun í vímuefnamálum eigi að hafa hamlandi (e. restrictive/use reduction) eða skaðaminnkandi áhrif (e. harm reduction) (Jónas Orri Jónasson, 2011). Hamlandi stefna gerir ráð fyrir að árangursríkast sé að beita hörðum refsingum fyrir fíkniefnabrot, eins og vörslu, neyslu, dreifingu og framleiðslu (Mendes og McDonald, 2001). Ef heildarneysla er minni og faerri prófa fíkniefni, sérstaklega unglingar, beri það vitni um jákvaeðan ár-angur stefnunnar (Hallam, 2010).…”
Section: Viðbrögð Samfélagsins Við Fíkniefnavandanumunclassified
“…Cornwell and Trumbull (1994, their approach was replicated by Baltagi, 2006), who also were among the first authors who applied panel econometrics, presented exceptional work because of their comprehensive list of law enforcement variables containing the probabilities of arrest, conviction (conditional on arrest), and imprisonment (conditional on conviction) as well as the severity of sanctions. However, the general impression is that only few studies have taken account of all factors, something that was also pointed out by Mustard (2003) as well as Mendes and McDonald (2001). In particular the interplay of conviction rates and sentence lengths, i.e.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%