William T. Pizzi

Seeing Red: Anger Increases How Much Republican Identification Predicts Partisan Attitudes and Perceived Polarization

We examined the effects of incidental anger on perceived and actual polarization between Democrats and Republicans in the context of two national tragedies, Hurricane Katrina (Study 1) and the mass shooting that targeted Representative Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona (Study 2). We hypothesized that because of its relevance to intergroup conflict, incidental anger exacerbates the political polarization effects of issue partisanship (the correlation between partisan identification and partisan attitudes), and, separately, the correlation between conservative partisan identification and perceived polarization between Democrats and Republicans. We further hypothesized that these effects would be strongest for Republican identification because Republican leaders were targets of public criticism in both tragedies and because conservative (Republican) ideology tends to be more sensitive to threat. In the studies, participants first completed an emotion induction procedure by recalling autobiographical events that made them angry (Studies 1 & 2), sad (Studies 1 & 2), or that involved recalling emotionally neutral events (Study 2). Participants later reported their attitudes regarding the two tragedies, their perceptions of the typical Democrat’s and Republican’s attitudes on those issues, and their identification with the Democratic and Republican parties. Compared with incidental sadness (Studies 1 and 2) and a neutral condition (Study 2), incidental anger exacerbated the associations between Republican identification and partisan attitudes, and, separately between Republican identification and perceived polarization between the attitudes of Democrats and Republicans. We discuss implications for anger’s influence on political attitude formation and perceptions of group differences in political attitudes.

Overcoming Logistical and Structural Barriers to Fair Trials at International Tribunals

This article argues that instead of trying to blend procedures from common law and civil law procedures, international criminal tribunals should move in the direction of the civil law tradition.

The Need to Overrule Mapp v. Ohio

This Article argues that it is time to overrule Mapp v. Ohio. It contends, first of all, that a tough deterrent sanction is difficult to reconcile with a system where victims are increasingly seen to have a stake in criminal cases. Secondly, the Article maintains that a tough exclusionary sanction is inappropriate given what police are asked to do on the street and the fact that concepts such as probable cause or reasonable suspicion are inevitably matters of judgment on which reasonable people will differ. Thirdly, the Article shows how the Court’s epistemological assumption that “hunches” are improper bases for action and that officers must instead have reasons they can articulate for their actions is outdated given social science and neuroscience research showing that humans often “feel” or “sense” danger, sometimes at a subconscious level. The Article’s main attack on Mapp, however, is on the Courts assumption that harsh sanctions deter undesirable behaviors. This is wrong in theory and is highly debatable empirically. Classical deterrence theory always insisted that deterrence must result from the consistent imposition of proportional punishment, not the imposition of harsh punishments. Moreover, our experience with deterrence, especially, the death penalty, demonstrates that the deterrent effect of harsh sanctions will always be speculative and uncertain. Unfortunately, having given harsh deterrent sanctions its imprimatur in Mapp, the Court is not in a position to challenge the many deterrent sanctions that push sentences in the United States higher and higher and set the United States apart from other western countries. The Article concludes that it is time for the Court to overrule Mapp and rebuild the exclusionary rule on a proportional basis, such as one finds in other common law countries.

Lessons from Reforming Inquisitorial Systems

1. Italys New Criminal Code In 1989, Italy adopted a new code of criminal procedure aimed at transforming an inquisitorial trial system into a system that would include a number of adversary protections.1 Everyone agreed that the Italian system badly needed major reform. The old system had degenerated to the point that Italys trial system incorporated almost all of the negative aspects one associates with inquisitorial systems?the secret assembly of an investigative file, the dominant importance of this investigative file at the trial, and a near total concentration of power in the judiciary. But although the reforms embodied in the new code were eagerly anticipated, they have not worked well in practice. For example, the attempt to transfer primary responsibility for the presentation of evidence from the judges to the parties has run into problems because it has been difficult for judges to let themselves be bound by the decisions of the parties. A similar problem has thwarted the codes attempt to introduce a limited form of plea bargaining. Al though it permits plea bargaining in minor criminal cases with a fixed sentencing discount in exchange for the bargain, plea bargaining is not used often because judges have a difficult time accepting bargains that mean that a defendant will receive a sentence that is