Punishment And Purpose ~ From Moral Theory To Punishment In Action

No Comments yet



List of tables and figures
Foreword – John Braithwaite

1. Introduction

2. The theoretical debate
– 2.1 Introduction
– 2.2 The need for philosophies and theories of punishment
– 2.3 Categorisation of philosophical theories
– 2.4 Retributivism
– 2.4.1 Negative and positive retributivism
– 2.4.2 The intuitionist approach
– 2.4.3 Restoring a balance
– 2.5 Utilitarianism
– 2.5.1 Bentham and Beccaria
– 2.5.2 Individual or general prevention? Muller’s utilitarianism pur sang
– 2.6 Mixed theories
– 2.7 Restorative Justice

3. Penal attitudes
– 3.1 Introduction
– 3.2 What is a penal attitude?
– 3.3 Why measure penal attitudes?
– 3.4 Approaches to the measurement of penal attitudes
– 3.4.1 Quantitative research
– 3.4.2 Qualitative research
– 3.4.3 Some final remarks

4. Development of a measurement instrument
– 4.1 Introduction
– 4.2 Measurement approach
– 4.3 Selection and formulation of attitude statements
– 4.4 Study I
– 4.4.1 Data collection and sample
– 4.4.2 Analysis and results
– 4.5 Revision
– 4.6 Study II
– 4.6.1 Data collection and sample

5. Intermezzo: legal context of the study
– 5.1 Introduction
– 5.2 Organisation of Dutch criminal courts2
– 5.3 The Dutch sentencing system
– 5.4 The discretionary powers of Dutch judges

6. Penal attitudes among Dutch magistrates
– 6.1 Introduction
– 6.2 Data collection
– 6.3 Response
– 6.4 Sample
– 6.5 Testing the structural equation model of penal attitudes
– 6.5.2 Interpretation
– 6.6 Rating scales for penal attitudes
– 6.7 Penal attitudes and background characteristics
– 6.8 Salience and assessment of colleagues’ attitudes

7. Punishment in action: development of a scenario study
– 7.1 Introduction
– 7.2 Goals of the scenario study
– 7.3 Method
– 7.4 Design
– 7.5 Measures
– 7.6 Selection of vignettes

8. Punishment in action: the scenario study
– 8.1 Introduction
– 8.2 Data collection and sample
– 8.3 Examining framing effects
– 8.4 Preferences for the goals of punishment
– 8.5 Sanctions
– 8.6 Goals of punishment and sanctions: consistency and relevance
– 8.7 Penal attitudes and goals of punishment: consistency and relevance
– 8.8 Concise review of findings

9. Summary and conclusions

10. References

Appendix 1 ~ 4

Appendix 1 Vignettes
Appendix 2 Coding of sentences
Appendix 3 Rank orderings of goals of punishment
Appendix 4 Canonical correlation analysis in the scenario study

This book is based on my dissertation. I worked on it at the Netherlands Institute for the Study of Criminality and Law Enforcement (NSCR) in Leiden. The Institute provided me with an interesting and instructive working environment and graciously extended its hospitality to me when the dissertation was overdue. The work would have been further overdue without the support I received from colleagues, including the technical and administrative staff. Furthermore, I doubt that in the future I will ever be able to combine work and fun as in the early years at the institute with the ‘Jackson Five’   (Danielle Otten, Janet Herbrink, Nathalie Vriezelaar, Francis Pakes and myself). I thank NSCR, the ‘Dr. Hendrik Muller’s Vaderlandsch Fonds’ and the ‘Meertens Bianchi Fonds’ for providing financial support in publishing this work.

Many people contributed to making this book possible. I would like to mention some to whom I feel especially indebted. I thank John Michon, Janet Jackson and Jan Fiselier who were closely involved in the project as supervisors. Their comments, suggestions and encouragement during our regular discussions were essential in making difficult choices and in keeping the research on the right track. I would further like to thank Joop Vruggink, Rien van der Leeden, Peter van Koppen, Hans Nijboer and Huib Pellikaan for their advice and help in various stages of the project and for being invaluable sparring partners. I thank John Braithwaite for his critical reading of the manuscript and valuable suggestions. The support and encouragement which I received from my parents and Jacky were absolutely vital for completing this work. I would like to stress that any credit for this book is, to a substantial degree, due to everyone mentioned. I would further like to point out that this would have been a very different book without the kind cooperation of many students as well as many judges and justices working in the district courts and the courts of appeal in the Netherlands. Their time and effort are greatly appreciated.

Bookmark and Share


Leave a Reply

What is 12 + 20 ?
Please leave these two fields as-is:
IMPORTANT! To be able to proceed, you need to solve the following simple math (so we know that you are a human) :-)

  • About

    Rozenberg Quarterly aims to be a platform for academics, scientists, journalists, authors and artists, in order to offer background information and scholarly reflections that contribute to mutual understanding and dialogue in a seemingly divided world. By offering this platform, the Quarterly wants to be part of the public debate because we believe mutual understanding and the acceptance of diversity are vital conditions for universal progress. Read more...
  • Support

    Rozenberg Quarterly does not receive subsidies or grants of any kind, which is why your financial support in maintaining, expanding and keeping the site running is always welcome. You may donate any amount you wish and all donations go toward maintaining and expanding this website.

    10 euro donation:

    20 euro donation:

    Or donate any amount you like:

    ABN AMRO Bank
    Rozenberg Publishers
    IBAN NL65 ABNA 0566 4783 23
    reference: Rozenberg Quarterly

    If you have any questions or would like more information, please see our About page or contact us: info@rozenbergquarterly.com
  • Like us on Facebook

  • Follow us on Twitter

  • Archives