Based on a factorial design survey of 237 Hamilton County (Cincinnati), Ohio, residents, we assessed not only whether respondents preferred, but also “tolerated” or viewed as acceptable, community-based sanctions. Rating vignettes in which the offender engaged in either burglary or robbery, a slight majority of the respondents favored a sentence involving incarceration. Even so, a sizable minority of the sample preferred to sanction offenders in the community, and tolerance for such a sanction was widespread. There was little support, however, for sanctions that did not involve the close supervision of the offender. We suggest that community-based sanctions will be embraced by the public only to the extent that a persuasive case can be made that the sanction punishes, restrains, and changes offenders—in short, that it “works.”
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Applegate, B. K. (1997). Specifying public support for rehabilitation: A factorial survey approach. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cincinnati.
2.
Applegate, B. K., Cullen, F. T., Link, B. G., Richards, P. J., & Lanza-Kaduce, L. (1996). Determinants of public punitiveness toward drunk driving: A factorial survey approach. Justice Quarterly, 13, 57-79.
3.
Applegate, B. K., Cullen, F. T., Turner, M. G., & Sundt, J. L. (1996). Assessing public support for three-strikes-and-you're-out laws: Global versus specific attitudes. Crime and Delinquency, 42, 517-534.
4.
Applegate, B. K., Wright, J. P., Dunaway, R. G., Cullen, F. T., & Wooldredge, J. D. (1993). Victim/offender race and support for capital punishment: A factorial design approach. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 18, 95-115.
5.
Bennett, W. J., DiIulio, J. J., Jr., & Walters, J. P. (1996). Body count: Moral poverty...and how to win America's war against crime and drugs. New York: Simon & Schuster.
6.
Blumstein, A., & Cohen, J. (1980). Sentencing of convicted offenders: An analysis of the public's view. Law and Society Review, 14, 223-261.
7.
Clear, T. R. (1994). Harm in American penology: Offenders, victims, and their communities. Albany: State University of New York Press.
8.
Council on Crime in America. (1996). The state of violent crime in America: First report. Washington, DC: The New Citizenship Project.
9.
Cullen, F. T., Skovron, S. E., Scott, J. E., & Burton, V. S., Jr. (1990). Public support for correctional rehabilitation: The tenacity of the rehabilitative ideal. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17, 6-18.
10.
DiIulio, J. J., Jr., & Piehl, A. M. (1991). Does crime pay?Brookings Review, 9, 28-35.
11.
Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New York: John Wiley.
12.
Doble, J. (1987). Crime and punishment: The public's view. New York: Edna McConnell Clark Foundation.
13.
Duffee, D., & Ritti, R. R. (1977). Correctional policy and public values. Criminology, 14, 449-459.
14.
Durham, A. M., III. (1993). Public opinion regarding sentences for crime: Does it exist?Journal of Criminal Justice, 21, 1-11.
15.
Elrod, P., & Brown M. P. (1996). Predicting public support for electronic house arrest: Results from a New York county survey. American Behavioral Scientist, 39, 461-473.
16.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (1994). Uniform crime reports for the United States: 1993. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
17.
Gendreau, P., Cullen, F. T., & Bonta, J. (1994). Intensive rehabilitation supervision: The next generation in community corrections?Federal Probation, 58(1), 72-78.
18.
Harland, A. T. (Ed.). (1996). Choosing correctional options that work: Defining the demand and evaluating the supply. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19.
Harlow, R. E., Darley, J. M., & Robinson, P. H. (1995). The severity of intermediate penal sanctions: A psychophysical scaling approach for obtaining community perceptions. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 11, 71-95.
20.
Higgins, D., & Snyder, R. C. (1996). North Carolinians want alternative sentences for nonviolent offenders. Overcrowded Times, 7(1), 12-15.
21.
Innes, C. A. (1993). Recent public opinion in the United States toward punishment and corrections. The Prison Journal, 73, 220-236.
22.
Jacoby, J. E., & Cullen, F. T. (1996). The structure of punishment norms: Applying the Berk-Rossi model. Unpublished manuscript, Bowling Green State University.
23.
Jacoby, J. E., & Dunn, C. S. (1987). National survey on punishment for criminal offenses: Executive summary. Paper prepared for the National Conference on Punishment for Criminal Offenses, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
24.
Johnson, B. (1994). To rehabilitate or punish: Results of a public opinion poll. American Jails, 8, 41-45.
25.
Langan, P. (1994). Between prison and probation: Intermediate sanctions. Science, 264, 791-793.
26.
Maguire, K., & Pastore, A. L. (Eds.). (1995). Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics—1994. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
27.
McCorkle, R. C. (1993). Punish and rehabilitate? Public attitudes toward six common crimes. Crime & Delinquency, 39, 240-252.
28.
McGarrell, E. F., & Sandys, M. (1996). The misperception of public opinion toward capital punishment: Examining the spuriousness explanation of death penalty support. American Behavioral Scientist, 39, 500-513.
29.
Miller, J. L., Rossi, P. H., & Simpson, J. E. (1991). Felony punishments: A factorial survey of perceived justice in criminal sentencing. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 82, 396-422.
30.
Ohio Criminal Law Handbook. (1990). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
31.
Pettinico, G. (1994). Crime and punishment: America changes its mind. The Public Perspective, 5, 29-32.
32.
Reichel, P. L., & Gauthier, A. K. (1990). Boot camp corrections: A public reaction. In R. Muraskin (Ed.), Issues in justice: Explaining policy issues in the criminal justice system (pp. 73-96). Bristol, IN: Wyndham Hall Press.
33.
Roberts, J. V. (1992). Public opinion, crime, and criminal justice. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 16). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
34.
Rossi, P. H., & Anderson, A. B. (1982). The factorial survey approach: An introduction. In P. H. Rossi & S. L. Nock (Eds.), Measuring social judgments: The factorial survey approach (pp. 15-67). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
35.
Sandys, M., & McGarrell, E. F. (1995). Attitudes toward capital punishment: Preferences for the penalty or mere acceptance?Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 32, 191-213.
36.
Scheingold, S. (1984). The politics of law and order: Street crime and public policy. White Plains, NY: Longman.
37.
Senese, J. D. (1992). Intensive supervision probation and public opinion: Perceptions of community correctional policy and practice. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 16(2), 33-56.
38.
Singleton, R. A., Straits, B. C., & Straits, M. M. (1993). Approaches to social research (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
39.
Skovron, S. E., Scott, J. E., & Cullen, F. T. (1989). The death penalty for juveniles: An assessment of public support. Crime and Delinquency, 35, 526-561.
40.
Steinhart, D. (1988, December). California opinion poll: Public attitudes on youth crime. NCCD Focus, 1-7.
41.
Sundt, J. L., Cullen, F. T., Applegate, B. K., & Turner, M. G. (1997, March). The tenacity of the rehabilitative ideal revisited: Have attitudes toward offender treatment changed? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Louisville, KY.
42.
Thomas, C. W., Cage, R. J., & Foster, S. C. (1976). Public opinion on criminal law and legal sanctions: An examination of two conceptual models. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 67, 110-116.
43.
Thomson, D. R., & Ragona, A. J. (1987). Popular moderation versus governmental authoritarianism: An interactionist view of public sentiments toward criminal sanctions. Crime & Delinquency, 33, 337-357.
44.
Thurman, Q. C. (1988). Taxpayer noncompliance and attribution theory: An experimental vignette approach. Public Finance, 43, 147-156.
45.
Thurman, Q. C., Jackson, S., & Zhao, J. (1993). Drunk driving research and innovation: A factorial survey study of decisions to drink and drive. Social Science Research, 22, 245-264.
46.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1994). County and city data book: 1994. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
47.
Warr, M. (1994). Public perceptions and reactions to violent offending and victimization. In A. J. Reiss and J. A. Roth (Eds.), Understanding and preventing violence (Vol. 4, pp. 1-66). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
48.
Warr, M. (1995). Public perceptions of crime and punishment. In J. F. Sheley (Ed.), Criminology: A contemporary handbook (2nd ed., pp. 15-31). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
49.
Welsh, W. N. (1993). Ideologies and incarceration: Legislator attitudes toward jail overcrowding. The Prison Journal, 73, 46-71.
50.
Zimring, F. E., & Hawkins, G. (1995). Incapacitation: Penal confinement and the restraint of crime. New York: Oxford University Press.
