journal article
Deterrence in the Twenty-First CenturyCrime and Justice
Vol. 42, No. 1, Crime and Justice in America 1975–2025 (August 2013)
, pp. 199-263 (65 pages)
Published By: The University of Chicago Press
//doi.org/10.1086/670398
//www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/670398
This is a preview. Log in to get access
Abstract
AbstractThe evidence in support of the deterrent effect of the certainty of punishment is far more consistent than that for the severity of punishment. However, the evidence in support of certainty’s effect pertains almost exclusively to apprehension probability. Consequently, the more precise statement is that certainty of apprehension, not the severity of the ensuing legal consequence, is the more effective deterrent. This conclusion has important policy implications among which are that lengthy prison sentences and mandatory minimum sentencing cannot be justified on deterrence. There are four major research gaps. The first concerns the mechanism by which police affect perceptions of the probability of apprehension. The second concerns the inextricable link between the deterrent effect of the threat of punishment and the potentially criminogenic effect of the experience of punishment. The third concerns the concept of a sanction regime defined by the sanctions legally available and how that legal authority is administered. Theories of deterrence conceive of sanctions in the singular, not the plural, and do not provide a conceptual basis for considering the differential deterrent effects of different components of the sanction regime. The fourth involves sanction risk perceptions. Establishing the link between risk perceptions and sanction regimes is imperative; unless perceptions adjust, however crudely, to changes in the sanction regime, desired deterrent effects will not be achieved.
Journal Information
Current issues are now on the Chicago Journals website. Read the latest issue.Since 1979, the Crime and Justice series has presented a review of the latest international research, providing expertise to enhance the work of sociologists, psychologists, criminal lawyers, justice scholars, and political scientists. The series explores a full range of issues concerning crime, its causes, and its cures. In both the review and the thematic volumes, Crime and Justice offers an interdisciplinary approach to address core issue in criminology.
Publisher Information
Since its origins in 1890 as one of the three main divisions of the University of Chicago, The University of Chicago Press has embraced as its mission the obligation to disseminate scholarship of the highest standard and to publish serious works that promote education, foster public understanding, and enrich cultural life. Today, the Journals Division publishes more than 70 journals and hardcover serials, in a wide range of academic disciplines, including the social sciences, the humanities, education, the biological and medical sciences, and the physical sciences.
Rights & Usage
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms
and Conditions
© 2013 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.
Request Permissions
journal article
Perceptual Research on General Deterrence: A Critical ReviewLaw & Society Review
Vol. 20, No. 4 (1986)
, pp. 545-572 (28 pages)
Published By: Wiley
//doi.org/10.2307/3053466
//www.jstor.org/stable/3053466
This is a preview. Log in to get access
Abstract
Recent perceptual studies of general deterrence have been guided by an unnecessarily narrow conception of general deterrence, despite the methodological advances in this type of research. These studies, moreover, have failed to recognize the complexity of the perceptual processes that intervene between the threat or experience of legal sanctions and behavioral outcomes. Consequently, the conclusions drawn from the findings about the process of general deterrence are questionable. This paper critically reviews perceptual studies of general deterrence with a view toward expanding the scope of deterrence theory and stimulating research in new directions. Suggestions are made about the kinds of data and analyses needed to test such theory more adequately.
Journal Information
Founded in 1966, Law & Society Review is regarded by sociolegal scholars worldwide as a leading journal in the field. The Review is a peer-reviewed publication for scholarship bearing on the relationship between society and the legal process, including articles or notes of interest to the research community in general, new theoretical developments, results of empirical studies, and reviews and comments on the field or its methods of inquiry. Broadly interdisciplinary, the Review welcomes work from any tradition of scholarship concerned with the cultural, economic, political, psychological, or social aspects of law and legal systems. JSTOR provides a digital archive of the print version of Law and Society Review. The electronic version of Law and Society Review is available at //www.interscience.wiley.com. Authorized users may be able to access the full text articles at this site.
Publisher Information
Wiley is a global provider of content and content-enabled workflow solutions in areas of scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly research; professional development; and education. Our core businesses produce scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly journals, reference works, books, database services, and advertising; professional books, subscription products, certification and training services and online applications; and education content and services including integrated online teaching and learning resources for undergraduate and graduate students and lifelong learners. Founded in 1807, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. has been a valued source of information and understanding for more than 200 years, helping people around the world meet their needs and fulfill their aspirations. Wiley has published the works of more than 450 Nobel laureates in all categories: Literature, Economics, Physiology or Medicine, Physics, Chemistry, and Peace. Wiley has partnerships with many of the world’s leading societies and publishes over 1,500 peer-reviewed journals and 1,500+ new books annually in print and online, as well as databases, major reference works and laboratory protocols in STMS subjects. With a growing open access offering, Wiley is committed to the widest possible dissemination of and access to the content we publish and supports all sustainable models of access. Our online platform, Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) is one of the world’s most extensive multidisciplinary collections of online resources, covering life, health, social and physical sciences, and humanities.
Rights & Usage
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
Law & Society Review © 1986 Law and Society Association
Request Permissions