NCJ Number
195493
Journal
Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology Volume: 92 Issue: 1 Dated: Fall 2001/Winter 2002 Pages: 307-333
Date Published
2001
Length
27 pages
Annotation
This article examines the death penalty debate as it was played out in New York from 1977 to 1995, examining it from the perspective of “commonsense” knowledge and cognitive dissonance theory.
Abstract
This article considers the claims and counterclaims made by death penalty supporters and opponents, as well as the primary manner in which these claims were advanced or refuted. As a case study, the author considers the 19-year debate over the death penalty that occurred in New York from 1977 to 1995. The authors examine the debate over the death penalty from the perspective of “commonsense” or ordinary knowledge, which is defined as that set of assumptions that most people hold to make sense of the world; thus aptly referred to as commonsense knowledge. The author also examines the death penalty debate in light of cognitive dissonance theory, which holds that people actively avoid inconsistencies in their thoughts, thus using selective perception to uphold their version of reality. Through this theoretical analysis, the authors show how the long-standing debate in New York survived attempts at resolution in spite of the introduction scientific, objective data concerning the death penalty. The authors conclude that although a preponderance of the scientific data showed that no deterrent effect was gained through the use of the death penalty, New York’s death penalty bill concluded that the death penalty would send a strong message of deterrence to persons who might be inclined to commit crimes. Thus, the commonsense knowledge that the death penalty can deter crime prevailed over the scientific observations to the contrary.