NCJ Number
51607
Date Published
1978
Length
7 pages
Annotation
A CRITIQUE OF THEORIES PROMULGATED BY PASSELL AND TAYLOR CONCERNING THE DETERRENT EFFECT OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS PRESENTED.
Abstract
IN THEIR STUDY OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT, PASSELL AND TAYLOR DID NOT ADEQUATELY ANALYZE THE DATA, AND THEIR NEGATIVE FINDINGS AND SOME OF THE INFERENCES THEY DREW WERE BASED ON TEST STATISTICS WHOSE PROPERTIES WERE UNKNOWN. THEIR ARGUMENT FOR POLICY IMPLICATIONS AGAINST REIMPOSITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY ON THE BASIS OF AN AUTOMATIC NEGATIVE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN EXECUTION AND CONVICTION RISKS WAS MERELY SPECULATIVE. THEY FOCUSED ON SUBPERIODS IN WHICH REGRESSION RESULTS WERE RELATIVELY WEAK AND DID NOT PROCEED TO ANALYZE THE INHERENT LIMITATIONS OF THE DATA THAT ACCOUNTED FOR THEIR RESULTS. IT IS CONTENDED THAT THERE ARE BOTH THEORETICAL AND STATISTICAL REASONS FOR USING LOG-LINEAR SPECIFICATIONS RATHER THAN A LINEAR FORMAT IN THE NATURAL VALUE OF VARIABLES WHEN INVESTIGATING CAPITAL PUNISHMENT AND DETERRENCE. RISKS OF EXECUTION AND CONVICTION CAN BE AFFECTED BY CHANGES IN THE PERCEIVED RISK OF VICTIMIZATION FROM MURDER AND RELATED CRIME. EVEN IF IT IS EFFECTIVE AS A DETERRENT, CAPITAL PUNISHMENT MAY NOT BE SOCIALLY DESIRABLE. THE ALLEGATION THAT THE REINTRODUCTION OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT NECESSARILY LEADS TO A RISE IN MURDER CANNOT BE DEFENDED. COMPATIBILITY BETWEEN TIME-SERIES AND CROSS-SECTION RESULTS OF STUDIES, NOT ALWAYS PRESENT IN APPLICATIONS OF ECONOMIC THEORY, ACCORDS SUPPORT FOR THE ECONOMIC APPROACH TO STUDYING CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS PROCEDURES ARE EXAMINED, AND REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (DEP)