Question

Locate 5 peer-reviewed articles that are related to your proposed research study 2. Summarize each of the five articles. *Discuss what they tested and what they found. 3. Discuss how each of the five articles are related or relevant to your proposed study. 4. Make sure to include in-text citations for all references in the section.

Answer

Name of Student:

Institutional Affiliation:

Contents

Introduction. 2

Zimmerman (2004). 2

Mocan & Gittings (2003). 2

Cochran, Chamlin & Seth (1994). 3

Dezhbakhsh & Shepherd (2006). 4

Donohue & Wolfers (2009). 5

References. 7

Introduction

 

Zimmerman (2004)

            This paper sets out to determine whether executions deter capital murder. The need to address this question arises because no definitive consensus has ever been reached among social scientists in regards to the deterrence effects of capital punishment.  To test the deterrence effects, the paper uses panel data on state-level trends in executions and its impact on capital murder between 1978 and 1997. It examines how death penalties have been enacted across states as well as the relationship between homicides and deterrence probabilities in those states.

ORDER A PAPER LIKE THIS NOW

            The results of this estimation suggest that there is a need for researchers to adjust for simultaneity in the relationship between homicides and deterrence probabilities in light of the various death penalties that have been enacted in different states. After correcting for this simultaneity, the results of this study suggest that on average, each state execution deters about 14 murders (Zimmerman, 2004). Another important finding is that the mechanism that actually drives the deterrent is the announcement of the capital punishment to the public rather than the mere existence of death penalty provisions in state laws. This study is relevant to the proposed study because it attempts to resolve the controversy surrounding the debate on death penalty and deterrence.

Mocan & Gittings (2003)

            The aim of this paper is to find out whether death sentences can deter criminal activities. To achieve this objective, the study analyzes state-level panel data set obtained from across the United States, containing information on crime, state characteristics, deterrence measures, as well as all death sentences handed out from 1977 to 1997.  Using this data set, Mocan & Gittings (2003) set out to assess the various ways in which capital punishment affects homicide. The study also matches trends relating to commuting of death sentences and executions with changes in criminal activity at the state level with a specific time frame. To control for the characteristics of individual states, the study assesses the effects of execution rate, sentencing rate, commutation rate, prison death rate, as well as homicide and imprisonment rates. By introducing aspects of state characteristics, the study creates a platform through which the effects of commutations and total removal from a death row can affect criminal activity.

            The results of the study indicate that whenever an execution is carried out in a state, the number of homicides decreases by a factor of five. Another finding deduced from the results is that the number of homicides tends to increase at the same rate with the rate of commutation. Similarly, an additional murder occurs every time a convict is removed from death row. Another finding is that no change in the number of robberies, assaults, burglaries, or motor-vehicle thefts tends to occur after prisoners have been executed, their death penalties commuted or their sentences removed altogether. This study is relevant to the proposed study mainly because it grants the researcher, for the first time, a review of the effects of both removal from death row and commutation on criminal activity in addition to the impact of the executions themselves.

Cochran, Chamlin & Seth (1994)

            This study examines the return to the death penalty by the state of Oklahoma in 1990 after a 25-year break. The study uses Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Supplemental Homicide Reports for Oklahoma between January 1989 and December 1991. This was a significant period for any study of the deterrence effects of executions in Oklahoma because the issue had generated significant coverage in the media. To test the deterrence effect of the resumption of the death penalty, Cochran, Chamlin & Seth (1994) used interrupted time-series analyses during the two-year period.

            The results of the analyses suggested that capital punishment neither acted as a deterrent for criminal homicides nor did it have a brutalizing effect. Another crucial finding was that contrary to the researchers’ predictions, execution did not have a deterrent effect on felony murders. In contrast, stranger homicides were found to be characterized by brutalization effect. Moreover, these findings were supported by supplementary analysis of how the re-introduction of the death penalty in Oklahoma contributes to deterrence. For purposes of the proposed this study, this article contains helpful information on the extent to which states should expect deterrence to occur when a long period of moratorium on executions is brought to an end through the introduction of the death penalty.

Dezhbakhsh & Shepherd (2006)

            This study’s objective is to find out whether the death penalty deters capital crimes. To do this, it analyzes panel data containing information on trends in executions and capital crime in 50 states between 1960 and 2000. The article makes an important contribution to the proposed study because it assesses the deterrence effects of capital punishment in various states based on empirical evidence gathered both before and after the imposition of moratorium. The imposition of moratorium creates a situation where a judicial experiment can be conducted with a view to determine how criminals respond to changes in the severity of punishment. The best time to assess this behavior is immediately before and after the imposition of a moratorium on capital punishment. To overcome the modeling criticisms that have been associated with earlier studies, Dezhbakhsh & Shepherd (2006) draw a distinction between the effects of the moratorium itself and that of actual executions. The study’s scope also extends to an assessment of the effect of moratorium on crimes that do not attract the death penalty.

ORDER A PAPER LIKE THIS NOW

            According to the results of this study, the deterrent effect of executions is not only evident but also significant. There are several distinct ways in which executions and moratorium deter murders (Dezhbakhsh & Shepherd, 2006). Dezhbakhsh & Shepherd (2006) have corroborated this evidence by comparing the deterrent effects both before and after the imposition of moratorium. Findings also suggest that there are significant differences in the way capital and non-capital crimes are affected by moratorium and executions. The study concludes that executions are beneficial to society because they deter murders. Its final recommendation is that policymakers should be careful not to apply executions in a discriminatory manner in order to avoid the risk of killing innocent people. In conclusion, this article provides a robustly candid appraisal of capital punishment as a deterrence for capital crime, and will therefore be very useful for the proposed research project.

Donohue & Wolfers (2009)

In this study, the aim is to determine whether the death penalty is a better deterrence of murders than life imprisonment. In this study, two opposing sides of the long-running debate are presented at the outset. One side comprises of people who argue that the greater severity of capital punishment makes it a better deterrent for murders. The other side comprises of people who argue that state-sanctioned executions may create an environment where unsanctioned homicides increase significantly. The study also highlights the lingering questions on which one between the death penalty and life imprisonment is more cost-effective as well as the death penalty is dreadful enough to potential murderers.

Rather than offer a definite answer as to whether capital punishment leads to a reduction in the number of reported murders, Donohue & Wolfers (2009) focus on highlighting the key issues that continue to confront researchers how seek to address this question. Thus, this study may not be depended on as the primary source of information on the proposed study. Instead, it should be used as a supplementary source of insights into the state of the art in regards to the current debate on the deterrence effects of capital punishment.

References

Cochran, J., Chamlin, M. & Seth, M. (1994). Deterrence or brutalization? An impact assessment of Oklahoma’s return to capital punishment. Criminology, 32(1), 107-134.

Dezhbakhsh, H. & Shepherd, J. (2006). The Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment: Evidence from a “Judicial Experiment” Economic Inquiry, 44(3), 512–535.

Donohue, J. & Wolfers, J. (2009). Estimating the Impact of the Death Penalty on Murder. American Law and Economics Review, 11(2), 249-309.

Mocan, H. & Gittings, R. (2003). Getting off death row: Commuted sentences and the deterrent effect of capital punishment. Journal of Law and Economics, 46, 453-478.

Zimmerman, P. (2004). State executions, deterrence, and the incidence of murder. Journal of Applied Economics, 7(1), 163-193.