NCJ Number
108604
Journal
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology Volume: 20 Issue: 3 Dated: (September 1987) Pages: 163-183
Date Published
1987
Length
21 pages
Annotation
The present study replicates some of the key findings of earlier 'revisionist' studies of public attitudes towards the punishment of offenders: 554 Perth, Australia, residents were interviewed from a sample frame of 800.
Abstract
Most respondents overestimated the amount of crime which involves violence, and tended to see the murder rate as 'increasing' when it is not. Most (76 percent) said that sentences 'are not severe enough'. However, 80 percent of these reported that they were thinking of a violent criminal when answering that question. It is suggested that general questions about crime may essentially reflect respondent concern about violence. The second part of the interview involved a split sample designed to test differences in responses to two types of item presentation. Approximately half the sample (288) were asked to choose a penalty they considered appropriate for three offenses. The other half were given brief descriptions of the offense and the offender and then asked to choose an appropriate penalty. The minimum sentences were significantly lower for the group given the case descriptions. The results are interpreted as suggesting that public responses to questions of punishment are largely influenced by stereotypes. A good deal of acceptance was found for proposed alternatives to imprisonment. The most popular (75 percent said 'yes, in all or most cases') was the use of attendance centers. Most respondents also favored programs for fine defaulters, on-the-spot fines for petty offenses, and a day fine system 'in all or most cases'. The implications of the results are discussed in terms of survey methodology and sentencing reform. (Author abstract)