NCJ Number
46057
Date Published
1977
Length
23 pages
Annotation
A STUDY OF ADOLESCENT ATTITUDES TOWARD CRIMINAL SANCTIONS AND THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM WAS UNDERTAKEN TO EMPIRICALLY EVALUATE THE DETERRENCE AND THE 'PAPER TIGER' MODELS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE.
Abstract
THE DETERRENCE MODEL HOLDS THAT THE EXPERIENCE OF CRIMINAL SANCTIONS INSPIRES FEAR, WITHOUT INCREASING ALIENATION, AND THEREFORE DEFLECTS PLANNED OR POTENTIAL CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR. THE PAPER TIGER MODEL ASSUMES THAT THOSE WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED SANCTIONS HAVE LEARNED THAT SANCTIONING SCHEMES CAUSE MINIMAL DISCOMFORT AND ARE RARELY APPLIED. THE DETERRENCE MODEL IMPLIES THAT INCREASING SANCTION SEVERITY WOULD RESULT IN BETTER DETERRENCE, WHILE THE PAPER TIGER MODEL IMPLIES THAT DETERRENCE WOULD BE FACILITATED BY INCREASING THE CERTAINTY OF SANCTIONS. THE RESEARCH DESIGN INVOLVED THE ADMINISTRATION OF A QUESTIONNAIRE TO A RANDOM SAMPLE OF 1,174 SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL PUPILS. DIMENSIONS ASSESSED BY THE QUESTIONNAIRE INCLUDED PERCEIVED PROBABILITY OF ARREST, PERCEIVED ACTUAL AND PERCEIVED IDEAL DISPOSITIONAL ALTERNATIVES, AND EXPERIENCE WITH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. ATTITUDES RELATED TO 14 SPECIFIC OFFENSES RANGING FROM GAMBLING TO ARSON AND THEFT. FACTOR ANALYSIS REVEALED THAT JUVENILES DIFFERENTIATE TWO TYPES OF CRIMES: MARIHUANA-RELATED OFFENSES AND CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY, PARTICULARLY COMMON LAW OFFENSES. PATH ANALYSIS WAS USED TO DETERMINE PERCEPTION OF SANCTION BY DEPTH OF PENETRATION INTO THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM: THOSE NEVER SANCTIONED (NONDELINQUENTS AND THOSE WHO HAD ENGAGED IN DELINQUENT ACTS BUT WERE NOT CAUGHT); THOSE MINIMALLY SANCTIONED, SUCH AS THOSE ARRESTED AND SUBJECT TO COURT HEARING OR PROBATION; AND THOSE WHO HAD BEEN SENT AWAY FROM HOME FOR DELINQUENCY. THE PERCEPTION OF SANCTION BY DEPTH OF PENETRATION WAS EXACTLY OPPOSITE FOR THE TWO TYPES OF OFFENSES: WHILE THE EXPECTATION OF ARREST AND THE EXPECTED LEVEL OF SANCTION DECREASED WITH DEGREE OF PENETRATION FOR DRUG OFFENSES, THEY INCREASED WITH PENETRATION FOR PROPERTY OFFENSES. FOR DRUG OFFENSES, THE EXPECTED SANCTIONS EXCEEDED THE IDEAL SANCTIONS AND WERE CONSIDERED UNFAIR; THE PERCEIVED UNFAIRNESS INCREASED WITH DEPTH OF PENETRATION. HOWEVER, FOR PROPERTY CRIMES, THE GREATEST PERCEIVED UNFAIRNESS WAS AMONG UNSANCTIONED ADOLESCENTS, WHO PERCEIVED ACTUAL SANCTIONS AS NOT HARSH ENOUGH. SANCTIONED DELINQUENTS, ON THE OTHER HAND, PERCEIVED PROPERTY CRIME SANCTIONS AS BEING GENERALLY FAIR. WITH SLIGHT RESERVATION, FINDINGS PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE PAPER TIGER THEORY FOR DRUG OFFENSES, WHILE FINDINGS ON PROPERTY OFFENSES ARE MORE CONSISTENT WITH DETERRENCE THEORY ESPECIALLY ON THE PERCEIVED CERTAINTY AND SEVERITY VARIABLES. IT WOULD SEEM, THERFORE, THAT INCREASING THE CERTAINTY OF SANCTIONING WOULD BE A MORE EFFECTIVE DETERRENCE STRATEGY. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT THE EMPHASIS ON DIVERSION FOR MOST YOUNGSTERS AND MORE SEVERE PUNISHMENT FOR A FEW MAY RESULT IN AN INCREASING PERCEPTION OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AS UNFAIR AND RESULT IN FURTHER EROSION OF THE NORMATIVE COMMITMENT WHICH SUPPORTS SOCIAL ORDER. NOTES, REFERENCES, TABLES, AND DIAGRAMS ARE INCLUDED. (JAP)