#10093. Comparing expert versus general public rationale for death penalty support and opposition: Is expert perspective on capital punishment consistent with “disciplined retention”?

September 2026publication date
Proposal available till 29-05-2025
4 total number of authors per manuscript0 $

The title of the journal is available only for the authors who have already paid for
Journal’s subject area:
Law;
Social Sciences (miscellaneous);
Places in the authors’ list:
place 1place 2place 3place 4
FreeFreeFreeFree
2350 $1200 $1050 $900 $
Contract №10093.1 Contract №10093.2 Contract №10093.3 Contract №10093.4
1 place - free (for sale)
2 place - free (for sale)
3 place - free (for sale)
4 place - free (for sale)

Abstract:
The author compared American criminologists’ stated reasons for death penalty support or opposition with those of the general public as reported by Gallup pollsters. While experts were overwhelmingly more likely to oppose capital punishment, the rationale for opposition or support were largely comparable for both groups, albeit with some potentially informative differences. As is the case with the general public, the most common reasons for experts opposition are moral beliefs, concerns about system errors, and the unfair application of the death penalty. Similarly, among the small minority of experts who expressed (often qualified) support for the death penalty, the favored rationale is simple retributive justice—exactly as is the case with the general public.
Keywords:
death penalty; disciplined retention; Marshall hypothesis; newsmaking criminology

Contacts :
0