Denise Paquette Boots

Attribution styles and attitudes toward capital punishment for juveniles, the mentally incompetent, and the mentally retarded

This study used attribution theory to explain respondents levels of support for the death penalty for juveniles, the mentally ill, and the mentally retarded via the administration of a quasi-experimental factorial survey to 697 subjects who were called for jury service. The results indicate that the respondents with dispositional attribution styles were significantly more likely to recommend a death sentence than were those with situational attirbution styles. Moreover, the study found that the effects of a large number of the “known correlates” of support for the death penalty were fully or substantially mediated by attribution theory measures. The substantive, theoretical, methodological, and legal/policy implications of the study are discussed.

POLITICAL IDENTITY AND SUPPORT FOR CAPITAL PUNISHMENT: A TEST OF ATTRIBUTION THEORY

ABSTRACT Studies of public support for capital punishment have consistently observed modest relationships between both political ideology and party affiliation and support for the death penalty; conservatives and Republicans are more inclined to support capital punishment than are liberals and Democrats. This relationship has endured over time and space as well as across a myriad of research designs. Despite its constancy, this relationship has remained unexplained. This study employs the theoretical rubrics of political socialization and identity formation and attribution theory to account for this relationship. Analyses of survey data obtained from jurors summoned to service provide clear support for our claims. That is, conservatives and Republicans are more inclined to support capital punishment because they are also more inclined to adopt a dispositional attribution style which stresses the individual responsibility, deservedness, and moral culpability of criminal offender

Gender Differences in Mental Health Problems and Violence Among Chicago Youth

The role of gender is critical when examining how mental health problems affect delinquency over the life course. This study explores gender and developmental pathways to violence for youth participating in the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN). Girls having oppositional defiant problems (ODP) were significantly more likely to self-report violence from late childhood through early adolescence; however, only depressive problems mattered for girls during late adolescence. For boys, antisocial personality problems during late adolescence affected violence. Moderating effects of gender were limited to early and late adolescence. Implications regarding gendered solutions when developing strategies targeting youth violence are discussed.

The Gender Gap in Support for Capital Punishment: A Test of Attribution Theory

Studies of public support for capital punishment have consistently observed a strong and enduring gender gap in the level of death penalty support, with males consistently more inclined than females to support capital punishment. This unexplained relationship has endured over time and space as well as across a myriad of research designs. The present study uses attribution theory in a factorial survey design to account for this relationship. Analyses of data obtained from jurors provide mixed support for attribution theory yet fails to bridge the gender gap in death penalty support. The implications of these findings as they relate to gender, socialization, and attributions are discussed.

Public Support for Preventive/Corrective Remedies Against Miscarriages of Justice in Capital Cases

The present study examines public beliefs of Florida citizens about the prevalence of miscarriages of justice in their state and their level of support for various proposed remedies. The study also examines various correlates of punishment beliefs and death penalty opinions. Using a self-administered survey of venire persons called to jury duty, this study found that the public believes that the prevalence of miscarriages of justice in capital cases is quite high. The public is supportive of nearly all of the proposed remedies measured and they are willing to pay more taxes to support the implementation of such proposals. At the same time, respondents report feeling that the officials responsible for such miscarriages of justice should be severely punished. Importantly, the results show powerful evidence of broad societal consensus on each of these issues. Legal and criminal justice policy implications of these findings are offered.

Life or Death: Using a Real-World Case to Assess Student Death Penalty Opinion

A significant body of scholarship addresses Justice Thurgood Marshall’s hypothesis regarding the nature of death penalty public opinion. However, much of this research is based on hypothetical scenarios or general classroom experiences versus real-world examples of the capital punishment process. The present study evaluates the power of the Marshall Hypothesis through a classroom exercise where students are exposed to the trial and punishment transcripts of a real death penalty case. Using a student sample from universities in Texas and California, the present study investigates how exposure to such information not only creates a unique learning experience for students and opportunities for faculty collaboration in the classroom, but also provides a new way to assess how exposure to information may impact death penalty opinion.

College Students’ Beliefs About Domestic Violence: A Replication and Extension:

In recent decades, significant effort and money have been spent to change social and legal responses to domestic violence and affect public perceptions. A small body of research has examined individuals opinions about what behaviors are considered domestic violence. Using a sample of college students, the present study examined a modified version of a somewhat popular instrument used to measure beliefs about domestic violence, extending previous work done by Carlson and Worden. Results indicated beliefs about domestic violence are multidimensional, depending on the nature of the behavior and, in part, the gender of the perpetrator. Opinions about the lawfulness of these behaviors fit the same factor structure as beliefs about domestic violence. Demographic characteristics, current relationship status, secondhand experiences with domestic violence, and perceived prevalence of domestic violence in the community are generally not related to beliefs about domestic violence or the lawfulness of these behaviors. However, attributions of blame on the victim are negatively related to domestic violence beliefs and lawfulness. Moreover, lawfulness is a key covariate for domestic violence beliefs. In addition, results also indicate that the gender of the perpetrator is an important variable affecting students beliefs about sexual assault behaviors. Results from this study support the prevailing ideas behind the Battered Womens Movement that enacting policies and educational programs deeming domestic violence socially, morally, and legally wrong could shift long-standing sociocultural beliefs about mens use of violence against women. Implications of this study for research and policy specific to college students are discussed.