Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Salvation or damnation?: Religion and correctional ideology

  • Published:
American Journal of Criminal Justice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Fundamentalist affiliation and religious beliefs are generally related to more punitive attitudes toward criminals. Fundamentalists also tend to attribute criminality to individual dispositional factors, and in turn, such factors are related to punitiveness. Recently, it has also been found that compassionate dimensions of religion are related to treatment-oriented policies. It is still not clear which dimensions of religion are related to punitive or treatment ideology and what effects religious variables may have when tested against secular concerns about crime and crime attributions. In the present research, we test three models of punitiveness and one model of rehabilitation with demographic, secular, religious, and attributional factors. We found that those for whom religion is salient in their daily lives tend to believe that the death penalty should be reserved for older offenders and that those who believe in a punitive God tend to support harsher punishments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Applegate, B. K., Cullen, F. T., & Fisher, B. S. (1996). Public support for correctional treatment: The continuing appeal of the rehabilitative ideal.Prison Journal, 77, 237–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Applegate, B. K., Cullen, F. T., Fisher, B. S., & Vander Ven, T. (2000). Forgiveness and fundamentalism: Reconsidering the relationship between correctional attitudes and religion.Criminology, 38, 719–751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barkan, S. E., & Cohn, S. F. (1994). Racial prejudice and support for the death penalty by whites.Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 31, 202–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, S. W., & Hartnagel, T. F. (1996). Lock ‘em up’: Attitudes toward punishing juvenile offenders.Canadian Journal of Criminology, 38, 191–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumstein, A., & Cohen, J. (1980). Sentencing of convicted offenders: An analysis of the public’s views.Law and Society Review, 14, 223–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohm, R. M. (1991). American death penalty opinion, 1936–1986: A critical examination of the Gallup polls. In R. M. Bohm (Ed.),The death penalty in America: Current research (pp. 113–145). Cincinnati: Anderson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borg, M. J. (1997). The southern subculture of punitiveness? Regional variation in support for capital punishment.Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34, 24–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowers, W. J., Vandiver, M., & Dugan, P. H. (1995). New look at public opinion on capital punishment: What citizens and legislators prefer.American Journal of Criminal Law, 22, 77–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Browning, S. L., & Cao, L. (1993). The impact of race on criminal justice ideology.Justice Quarterly, 9, 685–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. S. (1978). Causal theories of crime and their effect upon expert parole decisions.Law and Human Behavior, 2, 377–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. S., & Payne, J. W. (1977). Crime seriousness, recidivism risk, and causal attributions in judgments of prison term by students and experts.Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 595–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, F. T., Clark, G. A., Cullen, J. B., & Mathers, R. A. (1985a). Attribution, salience, and attitudes toward criminal sanctioning.Criminal Justice and Behavior, 12, 305–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, F. T., Clark, G. A., & Wozniak, J. F. (1985b). Explaining the ‘get tough’ movement: Can the public be blamed?Federal Probation, 49, 16–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, F. T., Golden, K. M., & Cullen, J. B. (1983). Is child saving dead? Attitudes toward juvenile rehabilitation in Illinois.Journal of Criminal Justice, 11, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunaway, R. G., & Cullen, F. T. (1991). Explaining crime ideology: An exploration of the parental socialization perspective.Crime and Delinquency, 37, 536–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durham, A. M., Elrod, H. P., & Kinkade, P. T. (1996). Public support for the death penalty: Beyond Gallup.Justice Quarterly, 13, 705–736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, T. D., Cullen, F. T., Dunaway, R. G., & Burton, V. S., Jr. (1995). Religion and crime reexamined: The impact of religion, secular controls, and social ecology on adult criminality.Criminology, 33, 195–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feiler, S. M., & Sheley, J. F. (1999). Legal and racial elements of public willingness to transfer juvenile offenders to adult court.Journal of Criminal Justice, 27, 55–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flanagan, T. J., & Longmire, D. R. (1996).Americans view crime and justice: A national public opinion survey. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garland, D. E. (1990).Punishment and modern society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasmick, H. G., Bursik, R. J., Jr., & Blackwell, B. S. (1993a). Religious beliefs and public support for the death penalty for juveniles and adults.Journal of Crime and Justice, 16, 59–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasmick, H. G., Cochran, J. K., Bursik, R. J., Jr., & Kimpel, M. (1993). Religion, punitive justice, and support for the death penalty.Justice Quarterly, 10, 289–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grasmick, H. G., Davenport, E., Chamlin, M. B., & Bursik, R. J., Jr. (1992). Protestant fundamentalism and the retributive doctrine of punishment.Criminology, 30, 21–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grasmick, H. G., & McGill, A. L. (1994). Religion, attribution style, and punitiveness toward juvenile offenders.Criminology, 32, 23–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadden, J. K. (1987). Toward desacralizing secularization theory.Social Forces, 65, 587–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamm, M. S. (1989). Legislator ideology and capital punishment: The special case for Indiana juveniles.Justice Quarterly, 6, 219–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, D. F. (1981). Causal attribution and punishment for crime.Deviant Behavior, 2, 207–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hindelang, M. J. (1974). Public opinion regarding crime, criminal justice, and related topics.Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 21, 101–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La Grange, R. L., & Ferraro, K. F. (1989). Assessing age and gender differences in perceived risk and fear of crime.Criminology, 27, 697–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langworthy, R. H., & Whitehead, J. T. (1986). Liberalism and fear as explanations of punitiveness.Criminology, 24, 575–591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiber, M. J., & Woodrick, A. C. (1997). Religious beliefs, attributional styles, and adherence to correctional orientations.Criminal Justice and Behavior, 24, 495–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lock, S. (1999).Crime, public opinion, and civil liberties: The tolerant public Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCorkle, R. C. (1989). Research note: Punish and rehabilitate? Public attitudes toward six common crimes.Crime and Delinquency, 39, 240–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moon, M. M., Sundt, J. L., Cullen, F. T., & Wright, J. P. (2000). Is child saving dead? Public support for juvenile rehabilitation.Crime and Delinquency, 46, 38–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ouimet, M., & Coyle, E. J. (1991). Fear of crime and sentencing punitiveness: Comparing the general public and court practitioners.Canadian Journal of Criminology, 33, 149–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandys, M., & McGarrell, E. F. (1995). Attitudes toward capital punishment: Preference for the penalty or mere acceptance?Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 32, 191–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandys, M., & McGarrell, E. F. (1997). Beyond the Bible belt: The influence (or lack thereof) of religion on attitudes toward the death penalty.Journal of Crime and Justice, 20, 179–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheingold, S. A. (1984).The politics of law and order: Street crime and public policy. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sessar, K. (1999).Punitive attitudes of the public: Reality and myth (from restorative juvenile justice: Repairing the harm of juvenile crime). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press/Willow Tree Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheley, J. F. (1985).America’s crime problem: An introduction to criminology. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprott, J. B. (1999). Are members of the public tough on crime? The dimensions of public ‘punitiveness.’Journal of Criminal Justice, 27, 467–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, B. D., Bowers, W. J., & Sarat, A. (1999). Folk knowledge as legal action: Death penalty judgments and the tenet of early release in a culture of mistrust and punitiveness.Law and Society Review, 33, 461–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinchcombe, A. L., Adams, R., Heimer, C., Scheppele, K. L., & Smith, T. W. (1980).Crime and punishment: Changing attitudes in America. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, D. C., Scheppele, K L., & Stinchcombe, A. L. (1979). Salience of crime and support for harsher criminal sanctions.Social Problems, 26, 413–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, C. W., & Foster, S. C. (1975). A sociological perspective on public support for capital punishment.American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 45, 641–657.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Boeckmann, R. J. (1997). Three strikes and you are out, but why? The psychology of public support for punishing rule breakers.Law and Society Review, 31, 237–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Weber, R. (1982). Support for the death penalty: Instrumental response to crime or symbolic attitude?Law and Society Review, 17, 21–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Census Bureau (2000).County and city databook: 2000. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wanner, R. A., & Caputo, T. C. (1987). Punitiveness, fear of crime and perceptions of violence.Canadian Journal of Sociology, 12, 331–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, R. L. (1992). Religious orientation, race, and support for the death penalty.Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 31, 76–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, R. L., & Thompson, C. Y. (1995). Religious fundamentalism, punitiveness, and firearms ownership.Journal of Crime and Justice, 18, 81–98.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice, University of North Carolina at Wilmington, 601 S. College Avenue, 28403, Wilmington, NC

    T. David Evans & Mike Adams

Authors
  1. T. David Evans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mike Adams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. David Evans.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Evans, T.D., Adams, M. Salvation or damnation?: Religion and correctional ideology. Am J Crim Just 28, 15–35 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02885750

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02885750

Keywords

Search

Navigation