Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Access Criminology and Criminal Justice journals now

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Crime & Delinquency
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Apospori, E.
Right arrow Articles by Alpert, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Notes

Research Note: The Role of Differential Experience with the Criminal Justice System in Changes in Perceptions of Severity of Legal Sanctions Over Time

Eleni Apospori

Geoffrey Alpert

This research tests the hypothesis that experience with legal sanctions raises one's perceptions of severity of punishment. Perceptions were measured among a group of adults after their arrest and the imposition of sanctions. The findings indicate that, overall, respondents raised their perceptions after their encounter with the criminal justice system. Particularly, among those who received more severe sanctions, a significantly higher number raised their perceptions as compared to those who lowered them. Among those who received lighter punishments, no significant difference was found between those who raised and lowered their perceptions. The implications for the deterrence doctrine are discussed.

Crime & Delinquency, Vol. 39, No. 2, 184-194 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/0011128793039002004
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Criminal Justice ReviewHome page
B. K. Applegate, H. P. Smith, A. H. Sitren, and N. Fariello Springer
From the Inside: The Meaning of Probation to Probationers
Criminal Justice Review, March 1, 2009; 34(1): 80 - 95.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Int J Offender Ther Comp CriminolHome page
S. E. Carmichael and A. R. Piquero
Deterrence and Arrest Ratios
Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol, February 1, 2006; 50(1): 71 - 87.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Crime DelinquencyHome page
D. C. May, P. B. Wood, J. L. Mooney, and K. I. Minor
Predicting Offender-Generated Exchange Rates: Implications for a Theory of Sentence Severity
Crime Delinquency, July 1, 2005; 51(3): 373 - 399.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 The Prison JournalHome page
D. C. May and P. B. Wood
What Influences Offenders' Willingness to Serve Alternative Sanctions?
The Prison Journal, June 1, 2005; 85(2): 145 - 167.
[Abstract] [PDF]