CONTACT US: Contact info
|
Citation |
Honeyman JC, Ogloff JRP. Can. J. Behav. Sci. 1996; 28(1): 27-35. |
|
Copyright |
(Copyright © 1996, Canadian Psychological Association, Publisher Elsevier Publishing) |
|
DOI |
|
PMID |
unavailable |
|
Abstract |
Investigated the effects that argument position (for or against the death penalty and type of justification for punishment (deterrence, morality, rehabilitation, incapacitation, economic, and possibility of mistake) have on the sentence recommendations of 305 university students (aged 17-54 yrs) for a defendant found guilt of 1st-degree murder. Only those arguments in favor of the death penalty, based on retribution, economics, and impossibility of mistake were effective in influencing Ss to recommend that the accused be sentenced to death. None of the arguments used to persuade participants to choose a life sentence rather than a death sentence had any significant effect. Compared to Ss who recommended a life sentence, Ss who recommended the death penalty were found to have significantly higher scores on a measure of vengeance. (French abstract) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved) |
|
Keywords |
Capital Punishment; Persuasive Communication |