Formation and change in lay evaluations of criminal sentencing: Misperception and discontent.

Abstract

In public opinion polls, a substantial proportion of lay respondents report that judges are too lenient. We examine the factors that contribute to this perceived judicial leniency. The majority of lay respondents in our study said that judges are “too lenient” in their sentencing of burglary offenders; yet, their own sentencing preferences were more lenient than the required minimum sentence for residential burglary. Our survey and experimental data suggest that citizens' opinions are formed by their inaccurate impressions of the seriousness of actual criminal cases as well as actual judicial sentencing practices. Our experimental research indicates that opinions of judicial leniency can be changed by providing respondents with an example of the typical case that comes before the court. Directions for future research are discussed.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 65 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.