Raising Considerations

Public Opinion and the Fair Application of the Death Penalty

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives. A major justification for capital punishment is its perceived public support, yet common measures of public opinion do not capture the complexity of death penalty attitudes. This research, first, examines the stability of attitudes regarding the fair application of the death penalty when those attitudes are expressed within the context of an enlarged pool of considerations about its administration and, second, evaluates the directional effect of the considerations on those attitudes. Methods. Data from a national telephone survey that capture the complexity of these attitudes are analyzed using ordered probit estimation. Results. These results indicate substantial instability in attitudes regarding the fair application of capital punishment given the context of more pertinent considerations. Furthermore, within this context respondents tend to indicate that the death penalty is less fairly applied. Conclusion. The justification for capital punishment may rest on oversimplified conceptions of attitudes toward the death penalty and its application.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)753-770
Number of pages18
JournalSocial Science Quarterly
Volume84
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

death penalty
public opinion
penalty
public support
telephone

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences(all)

Cite this

Raising Considerations : Public Opinion and the Fair Application of the Death Penalty. / Murray, Gregory Roy.

In: Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 84, No. 4, 01.12.2003, p. 753-770.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{93a604e0faa346e590ada93a67810d60,
title = "Raising Considerations: Public Opinion and the Fair Application of the Death Penalty",
abstract = "Objectives. A major justification for capital punishment is its perceived public support, yet common measures of public opinion do not capture the complexity of death penalty attitudes. This research, first, examines the stability of attitudes regarding the fair application of the death penalty when those attitudes are expressed within the context of an enlarged pool of considerations about its administration and, second, evaluates the directional effect of the considerations on those attitudes. Methods. Data from a national telephone survey that capture the complexity of these attitudes are analyzed using ordered probit estimation. Results. These results indicate substantial instability in attitudes regarding the fair application of capital punishment given the context of more pertinent considerations. Furthermore, within this context respondents tend to indicate that the death penalty is less fairly applied. Conclusion. The justification for capital punishment may rest on oversimplified conceptions of attitudes toward the death penalty and its application.",
author = "Murray, {Gregory Roy}",
year = "2003",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1046/j.0038-4941.2003.08404018.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "84",
pages = "753--770",
journal = "Social Science Quarterly",
issn = "0038-4941",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Raising Considerations

T2 - Public Opinion and the Fair Application of the Death Penalty

AU - Murray, Gregory Roy

PY - 2003/12/1

Y1 - 2003/12/1

N2 - Objectives. A major justification for capital punishment is its perceived public support, yet common measures of public opinion do not capture the complexity of death penalty attitudes. This research, first, examines the stability of attitudes regarding the fair application of the death penalty when those attitudes are expressed within the context of an enlarged pool of considerations about its administration and, second, evaluates the directional effect of the considerations on those attitudes. Methods. Data from a national telephone survey that capture the complexity of these attitudes are analyzed using ordered probit estimation. Results. These results indicate substantial instability in attitudes regarding the fair application of capital punishment given the context of more pertinent considerations. Furthermore, within this context respondents tend to indicate that the death penalty is less fairly applied. Conclusion. The justification for capital punishment may rest on oversimplified conceptions of attitudes toward the death penalty and its application.

AB - Objectives. A major justification for capital punishment is its perceived public support, yet common measures of public opinion do not capture the complexity of death penalty attitudes. This research, first, examines the stability of attitudes regarding the fair application of the death penalty when those attitudes are expressed within the context of an enlarged pool of considerations about its administration and, second, evaluates the directional effect of the considerations on those attitudes. Methods. Data from a national telephone survey that capture the complexity of these attitudes are analyzed using ordered probit estimation. Results. These results indicate substantial instability in attitudes regarding the fair application of capital punishment given the context of more pertinent considerations. Furthermore, within this context respondents tend to indicate that the death penalty is less fairly applied. Conclusion. The justification for capital punishment may rest on oversimplified conceptions of attitudes toward the death penalty and its application.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0344629290&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0344629290&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1046/j.0038-4941.2003.08404018.x

DO - 10.1046/j.0038-4941.2003.08404018.x

M3 - Article

VL - 84

SP - 753

EP - 770

JO - Social Science Quarterly

JF - Social Science Quarterly

SN - 0038-4941

IS - 4

ER -