abstract: Although most Americans support capital punishment, many people have misconceptions about its efficacy and administration (e.g., that capital punishment deters crime). Can correcting people’s inaccurate attitudes change their support for the death penalty? If not, are there other strategies that might shift people’s attitudes about the death penalty? Some research suggests that statistical information can correct misconceptions about polarizing topics. Yet, statistics might be irrelevant if people support capital punishment for purely retributive reasons, suggesting other argumentative strategies may be more effective. In Study 1, I compared how two different interventions shifted attitudes towards the death penalty. In Studies 2 - 4 I examined what other attitudes shape endorsement of capital punishment, and used these findings to develop and test an educational intervention aimed at providing information about errors in the implementation of the death penalty. Altogether, these findings suggest that attitudes about capital punishment are based on more than just retributive motives, and that correcting misconceptions related to its administration and other relevant factors reduces support for the death penalty. / Dissertation/Thesis / Masters Thesis Psychology 2019

The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees individuals’ right to trial by an impartial jury. However, empirical research indicates that the jury system is flawed, especially regarding judicial sentencing instructions. More specifically, jurors frequently misunderstand or misinterpret State patterned instructions. On a more encouraging note, there is evidence that comprehension of jury instructions can be improved. Thus, this research assessed improvement in juror comprehension using revised sentencing instructions. For the current investigation, participants included 201 volunteers called for jury duty in Western Tennessee. Data were generated via a questionnaire, which allowed for the collection of information relating to participants’ understanding of the sentencing instructions. Findings suggest that comprehension is low when jurors are only exposed to instructions written by the State. Furthermore, when jurors were given a more detailed explanation of certain problematic terminology, comprehension significantly increased. Policy implications of this research and directions for future improvement are discussed.

How society views the use of the death penalty as a means of punishment greatly affects the decisions of lawmakers, politicians who use it as a platform for election, and the criminals who commit the crime of murder. This study used 40 different vignettes involving real-life murder scenarios in order for participants to form a more precise opinion of what the correct punishment for the crime should be. Given a choice between the death penalty, life without the possibility of parole, a prison term of their choosing, or other, participants were asked to assign a sanction for each vignette. Respondents were asked to answer demographic questions about themselves in order for these variables to be regressed to examine how their status relates to their opinion of the death penalty as a punishment for murder. Statistical analysis showed income level, political affiliation, and religious affiliation to be significant variables. Analysis of the vignettes themselves revealed substantial variation in individual's willingness to apply the death penalty across various types of murder.

Prior research demonstrates that multiple dimensions of religiosity significantly predict punitive attitudes and militarism. This study highlights the importance of believing in a masculine God, an aspect of religiosity with a robust and consistent relationship to punitiveness and militarism, but which has previously been unexamined. After accounting for multiple aspects of religiosity highlighted by previous research—such as frequency of religious practice, religious tradition, fundamentalist identity and beliefs, and other dimensions of God image including love, anger, judgment, and engagement—believing that God is a “He” consistently and strongly increases support for harsh social policies targeting intra-societal enemies (criminals), as well as general militarism and campaigns targeting extra-societal enemies (e.g. “terrorists”). These results highlight the importance of theorizing and measuring gendered dimensions of belief in God, as well as the importance of fine-grained considerations of religion in studies of penal populism and militarism.

There has been an increase in writings that address the last statements of condemned offenders. Many of these writings suggest that exposure to the humanity sometimes exhibited in these last statements may steer public opinion against the death penalty. This dissertation tests this suggestion by exposing 400 participants to randomly generated vignettes containing various capital crimes, demographic characteristics, and last statements. The survey data are analyzed utilizing multilevel modeling. Study results include the effects of varying levels of demonstrated humanity in the last statements of condemned offenders on public opinion, and whether specific demographic characteristics appear to influence study participant responses. Findings showed no statistically significant results that indicate any effect on death penalty opinion as a result of reading last statements demonstrating humanity. Condemned inmates who did not provide a statement, or stated they had nothing to say, elicited higher levels of confidence that executing them was the right thing to do. Condemned inmates who claimed innocence in their last statements were associated with the lowest level of respondent confidence that execution was the right thing to do, and a higher level of support for life without parole as an alternative punishment. Recommendations for further research are discussed.

This thesis tests the three hypotheses derived from the written opinion of Justice Thurgood Marshall in Furman v Georgia in 1972. Subjects completed questionnaires at the beginning and the end of the fall 2006 semester. Experimental group subjects were enrolled in a death penalty class, while control group subjects were enrolled in another criminal justice class. The death penalty class was the experimental stimulus. Findings provided strong support for the first and third hypotheses, i.e., subjects were generally lacking in death penalty knowledge before the experimental stimulus, and death penalty proponents who scored "high" on a retribution index did not change their death penalty opinions despite exposure to death penalty knowledge. Marshall's second hypothesis--that death penalty knowledge and death penalty support were inversely related--was not supported by the data. Two serendipitous findings were that death penalty proponents who scored "low" on a retribution index also did not change their death penalty opinions after becoming more informed about the subject, and that death penalty knowledge did not alter subjects' initial retributive positions. Suggestions for future research are provided.

The death penalty in the US has long been characterized by racist prejudices and mistakes. Previous research suggests that the majority of those executed are intellectually disabled people, black people and the poor. Furthermore, innocent people are too often convicted and executed, those with intellectual disabilities lack adequate protection in the legal process and racism is an inherent part of the criminal justice system. This essay investigates which of the 11 American people, executed in 2021, were particularly exposed or vulnerable to the death penalty from an intersectional perspective. It captures patterns regarding the defendants' identity markers and the discrimination, human rights violations or constitutional violations that occurred in the cases and legal processes, according to the defendants' legal teams. The material consists mainly of legal documents and the research questions are answered through a qualitative text analysis, with Intersectionality and Critical Race Theory as the theoretical framework.  The research show that ten out of 11 cases were problematic or indicated ambiguities. Black people, intellectually disabled people and the poor continue to be discriminated against. Several of the defendants with intellectual disabilities would not be eligible for the death penalty today. In conclusion, black poor men with intellectual disabilities and a history of abuse, along with poor women with mental health issues, intellectual disabilities and a history of abuse, were particularly vulnerable to the criminal justice system, because of the multifaceted discrimination they were exposed to.

No description available.

A 2008 Gallup poll places public support for the death penalty at 64 percent. Stemming from an observation of how little is known about the death penalty, this study sheds light on six key areas of the death penalty: cruel and unusual punishment, deterrence potential, innocence, discrimination, cost, and the challenges created for the legitimacy of America's moral leadership internationally in conjunction with our evolving standards of decency. Following a review of existing literature, six conclusions were made. The first is the methods of execution authorized in this country are not administered "painlessly," and in accordance to the Eighth Amendment. The second is there is n~ evidence to support the claim that the death penalty has a deterrent effect. The third is innocent people have been sentenced to death. The fourth is the death penalty is being applied based on legally improper criteria (race, gender, and socioeconomic class). The fifth is from a strictly financial perspective the death penalty is unreasonable. Lastly is that maintaining our moral leadership as well as the death penalty cannot be done in the eyes of the international community, and the death penalty is on the decline. This study expands upon existing literature regarding the aforementioned six key areas of interests, through the use of a non-experimental, descriptive research survey. Results suggest that although an overwhelming majority of subjects are not knowledgeable about the death penalty, 45 percent still support the death penalty. Education may be the key to bringing a decline in support for the death penalty; those who have taken a class on the death penalty, or are currently taking one support the death penalty 17.4-19.9 percent (respectively) less than those who have never taken a class on the death penalty. In conclusion, support for the death penalty may be related to a lack of knowledge.

Capital punishment is a forceful moral issue that is frequently overlooked. This is possibly due to the reverence many have toward the rule of law or a passive acceptance of the status quo. In this thesis I will begin with a discussion of context to the topic of the death penalty in order to address potential biases. Then I examine not only the ethical merit of the death penalty but the foundational justifications for a system of criminal justice to show that the special relationship between the state and its citizens does not lend itself to or allow for the instantiation of the death penalty. I look first to several theories of punishment selecting the most viable theory in order to make the most plausible case in favor of the death penalty. From there I establish that there is some intuitive merit to the notion that the vicious deserve unhappiness and see how far that intuition might extend. In this section I examine the merits and demerits of Kantian retributivism in order to address the many intricate ethical and political issues involved in the death penalty debate. I’ve chosen the Kantian ethical framework because of the nuance with which many of the problems of retribution are solved. Kant insets the enlightenment principles into his moral framework and provides reasoned explanations for there insistence, as such his work provides a background from which I will work through details and resolve contradictions. I will then make an argument for the moral personhood of the state and sketch the special relationship it has to its citizens. Finally I will offer a system that incorporates the ideas developed in the previous sections and gives a practical answer to the death penalty debate. It is my ultimate argument that there is no absolute ban on the death penalty, possibly even some intuitive merit to the scheme, but ultimately many moral limitations on its implementation.