Abstract
Much of the criminal justice literature indicates that people’s support for harsh criminal sanctions such as the death penalty is strongly related to their beliefs about deterrence and their beliefs about retribution. In this paper, using social dominance theory as our organizing framework, we expand upon this literature by showing that social dominance orientation (SDO) is also related to support for harsh criminal sanctions, as well as to deterrence and retribution beliefs. In addition, we show that the relationships between SDO, on the one hand, and support for various forms of severe criminal sanctions, on the other, are mediated by deterrence and retribution beliefs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Consistent with the view of political conservatism as motivated social cognition (see Jost et al., 2003), we also found that a composite measure of political conservatism was significantly correlated with both SDO (r = 0.38, p < 0.01), and the three deterrence and retribution beliefs (correlations varying between r = 0.14, p < 0.01 and r = 0.20). In addition, political conservatism was found to be correlated with support for the death penalty (r = 0.21, p < 0.01), support for general punitiveness (r = 0.26, p < 0.01), and support for torture (r = 0.14, p < 0.01).
For a justification of this procedure, see Hertig (1985).
Note that only standardized coefficients are shown in the figure. Within LISREL notation, β-coefficients refer to direct causal relationships among endogenous variables.
Note that these indirect effect analyses are essentially equivalent to the results that one would obtain by use of the Sobel Test.
The mediational role of retribution between SDO and death penalty support is simply calculated by multiplying the connecting path coefficients (IE = 0.34 × 0.49 = 0.17). Thus, the total indirect effect of SDO on death penalty support is merely: (0.34 × 0.49) + (0.34 × 0.25) + (0.38 × 0.26) = 0.35.
Note that in LISREL notation, γ is the symbol used to represent the regression of an endogenous variable upon an exogenous variable, or the direct effect of an exogenous variable on an endogenous variable.
For the latest example of this form violence see the details of the James Byrd lynching (http://www.texasnaacp.org/jasper.htm).
References
Altemeyer B., (1998). The other authoritarian personality In Zanna M., (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 30 Academic Press San Diego, CA pp. 47–92
Baldus D., Woodworth G., Pulaski C., (1990). Equal Justice and the Death Penalty: A Legal Empirical Analysis Northwestern University Press Boston, MA
Bohm R. M., (1987). American death penalty attitudes: a critical examination of recent evidence Crim. Justice Behav 14: 380–396
Borowiak A., Golec A., (2004). Motivated cognition and cultural worldviews as predictors of political preferences/Poznawcze i swiatopogladowe wyznaczniki preferencji politycznych Stud. Psychol 42(2): 5–16
Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin (2003). Capital Punishment 2002. As cited in Wright, J. W., (ed.) (2005). The New York Times 2005 Almanac, Penguin Reference New York, NY
Darley J. M., Pittman T. S., (2003). The psychology of compensatory and retributive justice Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev 7: 324–336
Duckitt J., (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol 33: 41–113
Dunning D., (1999). A newer look: motivated social cognition and the schematic representation of social concepts Psychol. Inq 10: 1–11
Ekehammar B., Akrami N., Gylje M., Zakrisson I., (2004). What matters most to prejudice: big five personality, social dominance orientation, or right-wing authoritarianism? Eur. J. Pers 18: 463–482
Ellsworth P., Ross L., (1983). Public opinions and capital punishment: a close examination of the views of abolitionists and retentionists Crime Delinq 29: 116–169
Fagan R. W., (1986). Police attitudes toward capital punishment J. Police Sci. Adm 14: 193–201
Feather N. T., Souter J., (2002). Reactions to mandatory sentences in relation to the ethnic identity and criminal history of the offender Law Hum. Behav 26: 417–438
Fiske S. T., Taylor S. E., (1991). Social Cognition (2nd edn.), McGraw Hill New York, NY
Ginsburg R., (1988). 100 Years of Lynching Black Classic Press Baltimore, MD
Gramsci A., (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks Wishart London, England
Greenwald A. G., (1980). The totalitarian ego: fabrication and revision of personal history Am. Psychol 35: 603–618
Gross S. R., Mauro R., (1989). Death and Discrimination: Racial Disparities in Capital Sentencing Northeastern University Press Boston, MA
Heaven P. C. L., St. Quintin D., (2003). Personality factors predict racial prejudice Pers. Individ. Dif 34: 625–634
Hertig J. R., (1985). Multiple indicator models using LISREL In Blalock H. M. Jr. (ed.), Causal Models in the Social Sciences Aldine New York, NY pp. 263–319
Jackman M. R., (1994). The Velvet Glove: Paternalism and Conflict in Gender, Class, and Race Relations University of California Press Berkeley & Los Angeles, CA
Jost J. T., Banaji M. R., Nosek B. A., (2004). A decade of system justification theory: accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo Pol. Psychol 25: 881–920
Jost J. T., Burgess D., Mosso C. O., (2001). Conflicts of legitimation among self, group, and system: the integrative potential of system justification theory In Jost J. T., Major B., (eds.), The Psychology of Legitimacy: Emerging Perspectives on Ideology, Justice, and Intergroup Relations Cambridge University Press New York, NY pp. 363–388
Jost J. T., Glaser J., Kruglanski A. W., Sulloway F. J., (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition Psychol. Bull 129: 339–375
Kunda Z., (2000). The case for motivated reasoning In Higgins E. T., Kruglanski A. W., (eds.), Motivational Science: Social and Personality Perspectives. Key Reading in Social Psychology Psychology Press Philadelphia, PA pp. 313–335
Mitchell M., Sidanius J., (1995). Social hierarchy and the death penalty: a social dominance perspective Pol. Psychol 16: 591–619
Oswald M. E., Hupfeld J., Klug S. C., Gabriel U., (2002). Lay-perspectives on criminal deviance, goals of punishment, and punitivity Soc. Justice Res 15: 85–98
Payne B. K., (2003). Justification for punishing crimes against the elderly: perceptions of police chiefs, nursing home professionals, and students J. Offender Rehabil 38: 33–51
Payne B. K., Gainey R. R., Triplett R., Danner M. J. E., (2003). Justifications for the probation sanction among residents of Virginia: cool or un-cool? Fed. Probat 67: 42–48
Pratto F., Sidanius J., Stallworth L. M., Malle B. F., (1994). Social dominance orientation: a personality variable predicting social and political attitudes J. Pers. Soc. Psychol 67: 741–763
Redlawsk D. P., (2002). Hot cognition or cool consideration? Testing the effects of motivated reasoning on political decision making J. Pol 64(4): 1021–1044
Scott C. L., Gerbasi J. B., (2003). Atkins v. Virginia: execution of mentally retarded defendants revisited J. Am. Acad. Psychiatry Law 31: 101–105
Seltzer R., McCormick J. P., (1987). The impact of crime victimization and fear of crime on attitudes toward death penalty defendants Violence Vict 2: 99–114
Sidanius J., Levin S., Federico C. M., Pratto F., (2001). Legitimizing ideologies: the social dominance approach In Jost J. T., Major B., (eds.), The Psychology of Legitimacy: Emerging Perspectives on Ideology, Justice, and Intergroup Relations Cambridge University Press New York, NY pp. 307–331
Sidanius J., Liu J. H., Shaw J. S., Pratto F., (1994). Social dominance orientation, hierarchy attenuators and hierarchy enhancers: social dominance theory and the criminal justice system J. Appl. Soc. Psychol 24: 338–366
Sidanius J., Pratto F., (1999). Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression Cambridge University Press New York, NY
Steele T., Wilcox N., (2003). A view from the inside: the role of redemption, deterrence, and masculinity on inmate support for the death penalty Crime Delinq 49: 285–312
Sweeny L., Haney C., (1992). The influence of race on sentencing: a meta-analytic review of experimental studies Behav. Sci. Law 10: 179–195
Thomas C. W., (1977). Eighth amendment challenges to the death penalty: the relevance of informed public opinion Vanderbilt Law Rev 30: 1005–1030
Thomas C. W., Foster S. C., (1975). A sociological perspective on public support for capital punishment Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 45: 641–657
Thomas C. W., Howard R., (1977). Public attitudes toward capital punishment: a comparative analysis J. Behav. Econ 6: 189–216
Tyler T. R., Weber R., (1982). Support for the death penalty: instrumental response to crime, or symbolic attitude? Law Soc. Rev 17: 21–45
Unger R. O., (1986). The Critical Legal Studies Movement Harvard University Press Cambridge, MA
Van Hiel A., Mervielde I., (2002). Explaining conservative beliefs and political preferences: a comparison of social dominance orientation and authoritarianism J. Appl. Soc. Psychol 32: 965–976
Vidmar N., Miller D. T., (1980). Social psychological processes underlying attitudes toward legal punishment Law Soc. Rev 14: 565–602
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sidanius, J., Mitchell, M., Haley, H. et al. Support for Harsh Criminal Sanctions and Criminal Justice Beliefs: A Social Dominance Perspective. Soc Just Res 19, 433–449 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-006-0026-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-006-0026-4