Profiles in Change: An Alternative Look at the Marshall Hypotheses∗

∗The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions of Alexander A. Savon and Francisco Torano, and to thank the editor and reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions.

Abstract

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall once argued that informed opinion would oppose the death penalty for all but those who support it for retributive reasons. We examine the validity of these claims with data from a series of one‐group pre‐test–post‐test designs which stem from a formalized learning outcomes assessment for several courses on the death penalty. Results show solid, but imperfect, support for these claims. The analysis then proceeds by profiling those who changed their opinions consistent with these claims, those who did not change their opinions, and those whose opinions changed in a manner opposite to these claims.

∗The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions of Alexander A. Savon and Francisco Torano, and to thank the editor and reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions.

Notes

∗The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions of Alexander A. Savon and Francisco Torano, and to thank the editor and reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions.