This study tests the role of crime perceptions in mediating the relationship between religiosity and punitive attitudes about criminal justice. Specifically, we estimate the effects of (a) religious affiliation and (b) fundamentalism on punitiveness and assess mediation by dispositional attribution of crime, perceived rising crime rates, perceived immigrant crime, and fear of violent victimization. Data are from the 2014 wave of the Chapman Survey on American Fears, a nationally representative sample of adults in the United States (N = 1,573). We estimated religious effects on punitiveness using ordinary least squares regression and assessed mediation by crime perceptions with the Karlson-Holm-Breen (KHB) method. Punitiveness was positively associated with Mainline Protestant affiliation (vs. non-religious), Catholic affiliation (vs. non-religious), and fundamentalism (fundamentalism also largely accounted for heightened punitiveness among Evangelical Protestants). Perceptions of crime accounted for about 60% of the effects of religious affiliation on punitiveness and nearly 100% of the effect of fundamentalism. Perceptions of crime as caused by evil or moral failure, belief in rising crime rates, and perceptions of immigrant crime were important to explaining religious effects on punitiveness, while fear of violence was relatively unimportant. These findings illuminate the perceptual mechanisms underlying religious effects on criminal justice attitudes.
AltemeyerB (2003)
Why do religious fundamentalists tend to be prejudiced?International Journal for the Psychology of Religion13(1): 17–28.
2.
AmmermanN (1991) North American protestant fundamentalism. In: Marty ME and Appleby RS (eds) Fundamentalisms Observed. Chicago: University of Chicago, pp.1–65.
3.
ApplegateBKCullenFTFisherBS (2002)
Public views toward crime and correctional policies: Is there a gender gap?Journal of Criminal Justice30(2): 89–100.
4.
ApplegateBKCullenFTFisherBS, et al. (2000)
Forgiveness and fundamentalism: Reconsidering the relationship between correctional attitudes and religion. Criminology38(3): 719–754.
BaderCDBakerJODayLE, et al. (2020). Fear Itself: The Causes and Consequences of Fear in America.
New York:
New York University Press.
7.
BaderCDDesmondSAMenckenFC, et al. (2010)
Divine justice. Criminal Justice Review35(1): 90–106.
8.
BakerJ (2008)
Who believes in religious evil? An investigation of sociological patterns of belief in Satan, hell, and demons. Review of Religious Research50(2): 206–220.
9.
BakerJBoothAL (2016)
Hell to pay: Religion and punitive ideology among the American public. Punishment & Society18(2): 151–176.
10.
BakerJCañarteDDayLE (2018)
Race, xenophobia, and punitiveness among the American public. The Sociological Quarterly59(3): 363–383.
11.
BakerJWhiteheadAL (2020)
God’s penology: Belief in a masculine god predicts support for harsh criminal punishment and militarism. Punishment & Society22(2): 135–160.
12.
BaumerEPMartinKH (2013)
Social organization, collective sentiment, and legal sanctions in murder cases. American Journal of Sociology119(1): 131–182.
13.
BraunsteinR (2018)
A (more) perfect union? Religion, politics, and competing stories of America. Sociology of Religion79(2): 172–195.
14.
BergMT (2014)
Accounting for racial disparities in the nature of violent victimization. Journal of Quantitative Criminology30(4): 629–650.
BrittC (1998)
Race, religion, and support for the death penalty: A research note. Justice Quarterly15(1): 175–191.
17.
BrownEKSociaKM (2017)
Twenty-first century punitiveness: Social sources of punitive American views reconsidered. Journal of Quantitative Criminology33(4): 935–959.
18.
CasseseEEHolmanMR (2017)
Religion, gendered authority, and identity in American politics. Politics and Religion10(1): 31–56.
CochranJKBootsDPChamlinMB (2006)
Political identity and support for Capital punishment: A test of attribution theory. Journal of Crime and Justice29(1): 45–79.
21.
CochranJKBootsDPHeideKM (2003)
Attribution styles and attitudes toward capital punishment for juveniles, the mentally incompetent, and the mentally retarded. Justice Quarterly20(1): 65–93.
22.
CostelloeMTChiricosTGertzM (2009)
Punitive attitudes towards criminals: Exploring the relevance of crime salience and economic insecurity. Punishment & Society11(1): 25–49.
23.
CullenFTClarkGACullenJB, et al. (1985)
Attribution, salience, and attitudes toward criminal sanctioning. Criminal Justice and Behavior12(3): 305–331.
24.
Dowd-ArrowBHillTDBurdetteAM (2019)
Gun ownership and fear. SSM – Population Health8: 100463. doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2019.100463
25.
DurkheimE (1984[1893]). The Division of Labour in Society.
London:
Macmillan.
26.
EvansDTAdamsM (2003)
Salvation or damnation? Religion and correctional ideology. American Journal of Criminal Justice28(1): 15–35.
27.
Figueroa-CaballeroAMastroD (2019)
Examining the effects of news coverage linking undocumented immigrants with criminality: Policy and punitive implications. Communication Monographs86(1): 46–67.
28.
FroesePBaderC (2010) America’s Four Gods: What We Say about God – and What That Says about Us.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
29.
FrostNA (2010)
Beyond public opinion polls: Punitive public sentiment and criminal justice policy. Sociology Compass4(3): 156–168.
30.
GarlandD (2001) The Culture of Control.
Chicago, IL:
The University of Chicago Press.
31.
GarlandD (2013)
The 2012 Sutherland address: Penality and the penal state. Criminology51(3): 475–517.
32.
GrasmickHGBursikRJJr.andBlackwellBS (1993)
Religious beliefs and public support for the death penalty for juveniles and adults. Journal of Crime and Justice16(2): 59–86.
33.
GrasmickHGCochranJKBursikRJJr, et al. (1993)
Religion, punitive justice, and support for the death penalty. Justice Quarterly10(2): 289–314.
HallDLMatzDCWoodW (2010)
Why don’t we practice what we preach? A meta-analytic review of religious racism. Personality and Social Psychology Review14(1): 126–139.
36.
HanslmaierMBaierD (2016)
Re-examining the relationship between religion and punitiveness: Evidence from Germany. European Journal of Criminology13(4): 473–490.
37.
HayesAFCaiL (2007)
Using heteroskedasticity-consistent standard error estimators in OLS regression: An introduction and software implementation. Behavior Research Methods39(4): 709–722.
38.
HeiderF (1958) The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations.
New York:
John Wiley and Sons.
39.
JohnsonLMMatthewsTLAyersEK (2018)
Religious identity and perceptions of criminal justice effectiveness. Religions9(5): 157–172.
40.
KarlsonKBHolmA (2011)
Decomposing primary and secondary effects: A new decomposition method. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility29(2): 221–237.
41.
KarlsonKBHolmABreenR (2012)
Comparing regression coefficients between same-sample nested models using logit and probit: A new method. Sociological Methodology42(1): 286–313.
42.
KingAMarunaS (2009)
Is a conservative just a liberal who has been mugged? Exploring the origins of punitive views. Punishment & Society11(2): 147–169.
KohlerUKarlsonKBHolmA (2011)
Comparing coefficients of nested nonlinear probability models. The Stata Journal: Promoting Communications on Statistics and Stata11(3): 420–438.
45.
LotzR (1979)
Public anxiety about crime. The Pacific Sociological Review22(2): 241–254.
46.
MarunaSKingA (2009)
Once a criminal, always a criminal? ‘Reedemability’ and the psychology of punitive public attitudes. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research15(1–2): 7–24.
47.
MatthewsTJohnsonL MJenksC (2011)
Does religious involvement generate or inhibit fear of crime?Religions2(4): 485–503.
48.
McClurePK (2018) ‘
You’re fired,’ says the robot: The rise of automation in the workplace, technophobes, and fears of unemployment. Social Science Computer Review36(2): 139–156.
49.
O’MahonyDQuinnK (1999)
Fear of crime and locale: The impact of community related factors upon fear of crime. International Review of Victimology6(3): 231–251.
PayneBKGaineyRRTriplettRA, et al. (2004)
What drives punitive beliefs? Demographic characteristics and justifications for sentencing. Journal of Criminal Justice32(3): 195–206.
52.
Pew Research Center (2015) America’s changing religious landscape. Report, Pew Research Center, 12 May.
53.
PickettJT (2019)
Public opinion and criminal justice policy: Theory and research. Annual Review of Criminology2(1): 405–428.
RubinDB (1986)
Basic ideas of multiple imputation for nonresponse. Survey Methodology12: 37–47.
56.
SaccoVFNakhaieRM (2001)
Coping with crime: An examination of elderly and nonelderly adaptations. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry24(2–3): 305–323.
57.
ScarboroughBKLike-HaislipTZNovakKJ, et al. (2010)
Assessing the relationship between individual characteristics, neighborhood context, and fear of crime. Journal of Criminal Justice38(4): 819–826.
58.
SingerAJChouhyCLehmannPS, et al. (2020)
Economic anxieties, fear of crime, and punitive attitudes in Latin America. Punishment & Society22(2): 181–206.
59.
SmithGASciupacEPGecewiczC, et al. (2018)
Comparing the RELTRAD and born-again/evangelical self-identification approaches to measuring American Protestantism. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion57(4): 830–847.
60.
SprottJB (1999)
Are members of the public tough on crime? The dimensions of public ‘punitiveness.’ Journal of Criminal Justice27(5): 467–474.
61.
StataCorp (2019) Stata Statistical Software: Release 16.
College Station, TX:
StataCorp LLC.
62.
SteenslandBParkJZRegnerusMD, et al. (2000)
The measure of American religion: Toward improving the state of the art. Social Forces79(1): 291–318.
63.
TonryM (2008)
Crime and human rights – How political paranoia, protestant fundamentalism, and constitutional obsolescence combined to devastate black America. Criminology46(1): 1–34.
64.
TylerTRBoeckmannRJ (1997)
Three strikes and you are out, but why? The psychology of public support for punishing rule breakers.Law & Society Review31(2): 237–266.
65.
UlmerJTBaderCGaultM (2008)
Do moral communities play a role in criminal sentencing? Evidence from Pennsylvania. The Sociological Quarterly49(4): 737–768.
66.
UnneverJDCochranJKCullenFT, et al. (2010)
The pragmatic American: Attributions of crime and the hydraulic relation hypothesis. Justice Quarterly27(3): 431–457.
67.
UnneverJDCullenFT (2006)
Christian fundamentalism and support for Capital punishment.Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency43(2): 169–197.
68.
UnneverJDCullenFT (2010)
The social sources of American’s punitiveness: A test of three competing models. Criminology48(1): 99–129.
69.
UnneverJDCullenFTApplegateBK (2005)
Turning the other cheek: Reassessing the impact of religion on punitive ideology. Justice Quarterly22(3): 304–339.
70.
UnneverJDCullenFTBartkowskiJP (2006)
Images of god and public support for Capital punishment: Does a close relationship with a loving god matter?Criminology44(4): 835–866.
71.
WhiteJE (2014) The Rise of the Nones: Understanding and Reaching the Religiously Unaffiliated.
USA:
Baker Books.
72.
WozniakKHLewisAR (2010)
Reexamining the effect of Christian denominational affiliation on death penalty support. Journal of Criminal Justice38(5): 1082–1089.
73.
YamaneD (2016)
Awash in a sea of faith and firearms: Rediscovering the connection between religion and gun ownership in America. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion55(3): 622–636.
74.
YeldermanLAMillerMK (2016)
Religious fundamentalism and attitudes toward the insanity defense: the mediating roles of criminal attributions and attitudes toward the mentally ill. Psychiatry, Psychology, and Law23(6): 872–884.
75.
YeldermanLAMillerMK (2017)
Religious fundamentalism, religiosity, and priming: Effects on attitudes, perceptions, and mock jurors’ decisions in an insanity defense case. Psychology, Crime, and Law23(2): 147–170.
76.
YeldermanLAWestMPMillerMK (2019)
Death penalty decision-making: Fundamentalist beliefs and the evaluation of aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Legal and Criminological Psychology24(1): 103–122.
77.
YoungRL (1992)
Religious orientation, race, and support for the death penalty. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion31(1): 76–87.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
