Why Do We Punish? Deterrence and Just Deserts as Motives for Punishment
Kevin M. Carlsmith
Colgate University - Psychology Department
John M. Darley
Paul H. Robinson
University of Pennsylvania Law School
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 83, pp. 284-299, 2002
One popular justification for punishment is the just deserts rationale: A person deserves punishment proportionate to the moral wrong committed. A competing justification is the deterrence rationale: Punishing an offender reduces the frequency and likelihood of future offenses. The authors examined the motivation underlying laypeople's use of punishment for prototypical wrongs. Study 1 (N = 336) revealed high sensitivity to factors uniquely associated with the just deserts perspective (e.g., offense seriousness, moral trespass) and insensitivity to factors associated with deterrence (e.g., likelihood of detection, offense frequency). Study 2 (N = 329) confirmed the proposed model through structural equation modeling (SEM). Study 3 (N = 351) revealed that despite strongly stated preferences for deterrence theory, individual sentencing decisions seemed driven exclusively by just deserts concerns.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 15
Keywords: Punishment, desert, deterrence
JEL Classification: K14Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: March 30, 2005
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.297 seconds