“Myths” on the Safety and Health Benefits of Punitive Drug Sentencing Predict Public Support for the Punishment of Drug Offenses

• In Event: Psychological Mechanisms Underlying Lay Support for Criminal Sentencing Outcomes

Abstract

People’s “core beliefs” have often been considered an influential factor to their support for sentencing policies, approaches, and practices. At the same time, the supposed value and goals of long drug-related sentences, such as their positive effects for public health, public safety, and decreases in drug offending and recidivism, have been historically used by policymakers as main justifications for enacting and using punitive sentencing laws for drug offenders. This study, utilizing a large sample of members of the U.S. public collected via Qualtrics Panel, uses a randomized experiment to investigate if and the extent to which preexisting “core beliefs” about myths on the potential benefits of drug sentencing predict public support for punitive drug sentencing, as well as whether these relationships vary based on the type or severity of drug offense. Results indicate that myths surrounding punitive sentencing as a way to increase public health, public safety, and decrease drug offending predict public support for more punitive sentencing approaches to a range of drug crimes, particularly for offenses involving more serious drugs. These data and findings help to provide a better understanding of how to effectively encourage public support for evidence-based drug sentencing laws amid reform efforts.

Authors

• Carolina R. Caliman, Rutgers University

• Colleen Berryessa, Rutgers University