Abstract

For all their faults, public opinion polls are of great importance to public policymaking, especially on issues that are highly visible and controversial. In the context of capital punishment, researchers have repeatedly documented the strong relationship that exists among public, judicial, and legislative opinion. During the past two decades, popular public opinion poll results in the United States have shown considerable growth in the support of capital punishment. Although criticized as grossly overly simplistic, these polls are often employed to show that legislative and judicial decision making is “grounded” in consensual public opinion. A number of studies have questioned the validity of opinion polls as measures of attitudes on this issue—with apparent support for capital punishment dropping precipitously when alternative options, such as life imprisonment with absolutely no possibility of parole, are provided. The present article suggests that we are misinterpreting poll information in a more basic way—by effectively dissuading a “no opinion“ response through the use of a standard “no filter” question format. Even without providing additional information or alternatives to respondents, the present research suggests that reliance on standard questions that simply seek a favor/oppose response can overestimate support for and opposition to the death penalty. More important, the number of people with no clear opinion on this issue can almost double, simply by employing a different question format. Put simply, one of the most important determinants of public opinion on the death penalty is the way in which we pose the question.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.