The Gender Gap in Support for Capital Punishment: A Test of Attribution Theory

Abstract

Studies of public support for capital punishment have consistently observed a strong and enduring gender gap in the level of death penalty support, with males consistently more inclined than females to support capital punishment. This unexplained relationship has endured over time and space as well as across a myriad of research designs. The present study uses attribution theory in a factorial survey design to account for this relationship. Analyses of data obtained from jurors provide mixed support for attribution theory yet fails to bridge the gender gap in death penalty support. The implications of these findings as they relate to gender, socialization, and attributions are discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• attribution theory
• capital punishment
• gender
• public opinion

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank the State Attorney, Public Defender, judges, court personnel, and jury pool members of the 13th Judicial District of the State of Florida (Hillsborough County) for their cooperation and participation in this study and the anonymous reviewers for their helpful critique.

Notes

*p < .05.

Note: Data are logistic regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.

*p < .05.

Note: Data are logistic regression coefficients with standard errors in parentheses.

*p < .05.

These data were taken from a report by an assistant editor from Gallup Poll News Service, which has been tracking global death penalty opinion since 1936 (see Carroll 2004).

These seven studies are the only studies we have found that explicitly attempted to address the issue of a gender gap in death penalty attitudes. Some have established the enduring/persistent existence of this gap (Applegate et al. 2002; Cochran and Sanders 2009; Whitehead and Blankenship 2000); some have also attempted to account for its existence. For instance, Hurwitz and Smithey (1998) found that male–female differences in fear of crime, support for crime prevention measures, and socialization experiences were significantly associated with punitiveness, but these factors could not substantially attenuate the gender gap. Likewise, Stack (2000) tested the effects of symbolic orientations, crime salience, and demographic factors on death penalty support in gender-specific models but failed to observe any significant gendered effects. Conversely, Robbers (2006) conducted gender-specific analyses and found some evidence of gender-specific correlates of death penalty support: openness for males and conscientiousness for females. Similarly, Gault and Sabini (2000) observed gendered effects of both state- and trait-based anger and empathy on male and female attitudes toward punitive, reparative, and preventative polices. Although some of these studies have found common correlates of death penalty support between males and females, and some have also observed gender-specific correlates as well, none of these studies has been able to fully or even substantially attenuate the gender gap. The most convincing evidence of the enduring nature of this gender gap comes from the study by Cochran and Sanders (2009), who, despite testing literally hundreds of models and controls for a vast array of factors that theoretically could/should close or narrow this gap, failed to do so.

It is noteworthy that within a short period of time after these data were collected, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down two landmark decisions regarding the execution of special offender populations. Specifically, the Court held that the evolving standards of decency in this country no longer permitted the death penalty for either juvenile (Roper v. Simmons 2005) or mentally retarded (Atkins v. Virginia 2002) offenders. Public opinion polls and international opinion are two of the valid indices cited by the Court in the evolving standards test, as well as legislation and religious/human rights organization positions across the world, that prohibits the extension of the death penalty for specific offender populations (see Atkins v. Virginia 2002:2249; Roper v. Simmons 2005:575–579). Thus, the significant and robust levels of general death penalty support from male respondents for the continued execution of these special offender groups is in direct conflict with the larger societal consensus that found this sanction inappropriate when applied to offenders who possess such diminished mental capacity, whether that be due to emotional immaturity or mental handicap.