Testing the Intuitive Retributivism Dual Process Model

Abstract. Research on the motives individuals have to punish criminal offenders suggests that punitive reactions are primarily driven by retributive, not utilitarian, motives. To explain this, several authors have suggested a dual process model (DPM) of punitive reactions. According to this model, punitive reactions are the product of two distinct types of processing (type I and type II), which differentially support retributive vs. utilitarian punishment motives. In response to cases of criminal wrongdoing, type I swiftly outputs a retributive reaction. In contrast, for utilitarian motives to play a role, this reaction has to be overridden by type II processing, which only happens rarely. In this article, we argue that despite its popularity, there is little concrete evidence for the DPM. We then report the results of a preregistered study investigating the effect of increased processing effort on retributive vs. utilitarian punitive reactions. We argue that the results fail to support the DPM.

A Painful Message

Abstract. This preregistered experiment examined two proximate drivers of retributive punishment attitudes: the motivation to make the perpetrator suffer, and understand the wrongfulness of his offense. In a sample of 514 US adults, we presented criminal case summaries that varied the level of suffering (absent vs. present) and understanding (absent vs. present) experienced by the perpetrator and measured punishment judgments and attitudes. Our results demonstrate, as predicted, that participants were more satisfied by the sentence and less punitive when they believed that the perpetrator had suffered from the punishment or that he understood the wrongfulness of his actions. This pattern held across crimes of varying seriousness (theft vs. aggravated robbery) and across two narrative perspectives (participant as victim vs. participant as third party). However, joint evidence of suffering and understanding did not strengthen this effect, contrary to predictions. We discuss the implications of these findings for leading philosophical theories of punishment.

Third-party Views of Incarceration: Justice, Desistance, and Offender Reintegration

One potential reason for punishing criminal offenders is so that third parties will become willing to socially reintegrate the offenders after their punishments have been completed. Another reason is simply to satisfy third-party desires that appropriate punishments be issued. In an experimental study, conducted with undergraduate students in South Africa, it was found that increasing the length of incarceration had a causal effect on increasing both reintegration willingness and punishment appropriateness, but the effect on reintegration willingness was substantially smaller. Also, two intermediary punishment goals were tested as mediators: the perceived likelihood of criminal desistance, and the perceived attainment of punitive justice. For the relationship between length of incarceration and reintegration willingness, desistance acted as a mediator but punitive justice did not. The findings indicate that, in order to increase reintegration willingness, policies need to increase the perceived likelihood of desistance rather than the perceived attainment of punitive justice.

Listening to the Experts: A National Study of Correctional Administrators' Responses to Prison Overcrowding

The population explosion in American prisons in the past decade and the accompanying problems of crowding, disorder, violence, and kindred phenomena have been widely publicized. However, much less is known about the views of correctional administrators regarding these phenomena. This paper presents survey data from the 50 state correctional directors, who were queried about the extent of prison overcrowding in their states and the various administrative responses they have adopted to deal with the problem. The paper also examines the administrators' views regarding alternatives to incarceration and the classes of offenders whom they perceive to be eligible for these incarceration alternatives.

An Attributional Analysis of Punishment Goals and Public Reactions to O. J. Simpson

Two studies examined the attributional determinants of punishment decisions. Study 1 investigated public reactions to 0. J. Simpson during the week following his arrest for the murder of his ex-wife. Respondents who believed Simpson was guilty were asked about their perceptions of the causes of his alleged crime, their affective reactions of anger and sympathy, how much punishment he should receive, and their endorsement of retributive and utilitarian punishment goals. In Study 2 college students made similar judgments about a hypothetical defendant accused of murder. Both studies support an attributional analysis of relations between causal controllability, stability, sympathy and anger, punishment severity, and specific punishment goals. Implications for attribution theory, as well as the distinction between retributive versus utilitarian punishment goals, are discussed.

PTSD symptom clusters, feelings of revenge, and perceptions of perpetrator punishment severity in victims of interpersonal violence

Feelings of revenge have often been found to correlate with symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Which PTSD symptom cluster prevails in this association is, however, unknown. Furthermore, previous studies suggest that revenge may be satisfied by perceptions of perpetrator punishment severity, but did not control for concurrent symptoms of PTSD. Therefore, this study explored associations between PTSD symptom clusters, feelings of revenge, and perceived perpetrator punishment severity in a sample of victims of interpersonal violence. Results indicated that the re-experiencing/intrusion symptom cluster was the only index of PTSD which was related to victims' feelings of revenge (n=207). Revenge correlated negatively with perceptions of punishment severity in victim who knew that the perpetrator had been sentenced, but not after adjustment for PTSD symptoms (n=96).

Tax amnesties, justice perceptions, and filing behavior: a simulation study

A simulation study demonstrates the influence of perceived justice of a tax amnesty on subsequent tax compliance. In addition, it investigates how the amnesty is perceived to serve the punishment objectives retribution (i.e., giving offenders what they "deserve") and value restoration (i.e., restoring the values violated by tax evasion). Hierarchical regression analysis revealed the expected positive influence of justice on subsequent tax compliance. However, when the influence of punishment objectives was controlled for, the influence of justice disappeared, while retribution and value restoration showed positive effects on post-amnesty tax compliance.

Retributive and restorative justice

The emergence of restorative justice as an alternative model to Western, court-based criminal justice may have important implications for the psychology of justice. It is proposed that two different notions of justice affect responses to rule-breaking: restorative and retributive justice. Retributive justice essentially refers to the repair of justice through unilateral imposition of punishment, whereas restorative justice means the repair of justice through reaffirming a shared value-consensus in a bilateral process. Among the symbolic implications of transgressions, concerns about status and power are primarily related to retributive justice and concerns about shared values are primarily related to restorative justice. At the core of these processes, however, lies the parties' construal of their identity relation, specifically whether or not respondents perceive to share an identity with the offender. The specific case of intergroup transgressions is discussed, as are implications for future research on restoring a sense of justice after rule-breaking.

No skin off my back: retribution deficits in psychopathic motives for punishment

When deciding a criminal's punishment, people typically exhibit both retributive and consequentialist motives in their decision making, though retribution's role may be stronger. This study aimed to discern possible functions of retribution by examining a population predicted to be deficient in retributive drive. Participants who rated either high or low in psychopathic traits read stories about a homicide. These stories were designed to evoke both retribution and the consequentialist motive of behavior control by varying, respectively, criminal intent and likelihood of recidivism. The participants then recommended a length of confinement for the offender. Individuals high in psychopathic traits were uniquely insensitive to retributive cues, and they were particularly consequentialist in their punishment of criminal offenders. These results clarify aspects of psychopathic aggression and corroborate the hypothesis that retribution may stabilize cooperative behavior.

Free will, determinism, and punishment

Determinists were compared with weak, moderate, and strong libertarians with respect to philosophy of punishment. Data provided support for the contention that determinists are less punitive than libertarians.