The perceived seriousness of crimes: inter-individual commonalities and differences (original) (raw)

Consensus in Crime Seriousness: Empirical Reality or Methodological Artifact?*

Criminology, 1985

has recently argued that the consistent findings of widespread consensus in the rankings of the seriousness of crimes may be more a rejection of the methodological approaches used by past researchers than of actual public sentiments. Building on Miethe's insights, this paper examines the extent to which the nature of the techniques employed to analyze data influences seriousness evaluations. The results indicate that consensus is affected by such factors as the rating task given to the subjects, how consensus is measured, and the type of offense under investigation. In turn these methodological considerations caution against using existing research as the bask either for the verification of consensus theories of justice or for the formulation of sanctioning policy. Since the classic study of Sellin and Wolfgang appeared in 1964, a sizable and growing body of research has emerged that seeks to measure perceptions of the seriousness of illegal behaviors. Perhaps the most consistent conclusion drawn from this empirical tradition is that there is widespread consensus both within and across cultures concerning the relative gravity of various criminal acts (Cullen, Link, and Polanzi We would like to thank Roland Chilton, Sandra Evans Skovron, and two Criminology reviewers for their helpful comments on previous drafts of this manuscript. Address all correspondence to: Francis T. Cullen, Criminal Justice Program, Mail Location 108, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221. CRIMINOLOGY VOLUME 23 NUMBER 1 1985 99 100 CULLEN, LINK, TRAVIS, AND WOZNIAK pragmatic implications. Theoretically, the ubiquitous agreement on seriousness rankings is often cited in support of a consensus as opposed to a conflict model of criminal law Michalowski and Bohlander, 1976; . With regard to policy, the ostensible existence of an underlying normative structure can be used to legitimate the differential allocation of criminal justice resources and the setting of sentence severity levels according to the seriousness ranking of any given offense or category of offenses (Blumstein and

Figure and Ground in the Perception of Crime Severity

International Journal of Group Tensions, 1997

Existing group tensions provide a convenient background against which one might both judge the severity of a violent crime and understand the underlying motivation for such an act. By changing the presented context, one should be able to influence the perceived severity of the crime. In the present experiment, 33 Israeli policemen were presented with a series of vignettes describing

Individual and Contextual Factors in Determining Attitudes Towards Crime and Punishment

Recent Advances in IT, Tourism, Economics, Management and Agriculture, 2018

The paper looks at the market for crime focusing on attitudes toward punishment and law obedience as expressed and collected by the fifth round of the European Social Survey in 2010. We find that highly educated people living in less corrupted countries show relatively more tolerant attitudes towards lawlessness and require less severe punishments for crimes. Compared to the previous literature, it confirms a modern view of fighting crime, based on education and civic sense rather than on fines and jail.

Public perceptions of the seriousness of crime: Weighing the harm and the wrong

European Journal of Criminology, 2018

The seriousness of crime or ‘crime seriousness’ bears on at least four areas of criminal policy (sentencing, criminalization, crime control and prevention) but is poorly defined. After providing a novel conceptualization of crime seriousness, this article explores the logic – or normative philosophical principles – behind the public’s assessment of crime seriousness and considers how the public’s logic aligns with legal principles and policy requirements. A general population survey administered in 2014 in Belgium and eliciting 1278 valid responses indicates that the public’s logic is more moralist than consequentialist and raises doubts about the validity of public perceptions of crime seriousness as an indicator of crime seriousness for policy-making.

How fear of crime affects punitive attitudes

This article investigates different types of fear of crime as predictors for punitive attitudes. Using data from a Germany-wide representative survey (n = 1272) it examines the reliability and validity of survey instruments through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and uses structural equation modeling (SEM) to explain variations in the level of respondents' punitive attitudes. The results show that different emotional and cognitive responses to crime have a distinctive effect on the formation of punitive attitudes. These effects vary significantly depending on socio-demographic factors and assumed purposes of punishment. A crucial observation of the study is that men's fear of crime works in a different way in the formation of punitive attitudes than women's fear of crime. The perceived locus of control for the crime threat is a possible explanation for this difference.

If the Punishment Should Fit the Crime, How Serious Are 75 Crimes? An Empirical Study

European Journal of Economics, Law and Politics

This paper reports on the results of a survey of more than 500 young and middleaged college-educated adults regarding their views on the seriousness of 75 crimes. If the goal is to apply the legal principle that the punishment should fit the crime, one must first know how serious the crime is. This study ranks 75 crimes in terms of seriousness, using a Likert Scale where 1 is not at all serious and 100 is extremely serious. Some comparisons of mean scores were made, and p-values were computed, to determine whether certain crimes are significantly more serious than other crimes. Is the life of a prostitute more or less valuable than the life of a drug dealer, politician or lawyer? Are some kinds of discrimination more serious than others? In the case of statutory rape, should the criminal be punished more severely if it is a man rather than a woman, or should their punishments be equal? These and other questions are answered in this study. The authors grant permission to replicate th...

Criminality and Social Interaction

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2000

Taking into account the scope of the factors, which may have influence over crime, is not most reasonable strategy to approach this point under a restricted view. The approach which gives us the support on this research, parts from the foundation that crimes have diverse nature, not only for its type but, primarily on its determinants. Therefore, there should be a demarcation line which limits these different categories of crimes, when it is regarding to the nature of the motivation for committing a crime. Such motivation may be associated to economic factors or social interaction.