This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ryckman, R. M. Articles by Robbins, M. A. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Ryckman, R. M. Articles by Robbins, M. A. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Authoritarianism and Sentencing Strategies for Low and High Severity Crimes

University of Maine at Orono

Michael J. Burns

University of Maine at Orono

Michael A. Robbins

University of Maine at Orono

This study focused on differences in the penal philosophies of high and low authoritarian subjects in sentencing offenders who had committed low or high severity crimes. Contrary to a major prediction based on Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswick, Levinson, and Sanford's psychodynamic theory of the authoritarian personality, the data indicated that high authoritarians relied more heavily on harsher sentencing strategies like general and specific deterrence than low authoritarians, but only when judging offenders who had committed high severity crimes such as murder, rape, and manslaughter. For the most part, high and low authoritarians did not differ when judging lawbreakers who committed low severity crimes such as shoplifting, car theft, and forgery. Discussion focused on the deficiencies inherent in traditional psychodynamic theories which limit their predictive utility.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?