Search

Stafford and Warr (1993) reconceptualized general and specific deterrence into a single theory in which individuals' propensities to engage in crime are based on a combination of personal and vicarious experiences with being punished and avoiding punishment. The current study extends prior tests of this conceptualization of deterrence by expanding the definition of vicarious experience, analyzing extralegal as well as legal consequences, examining multiple types of offending behavior, and drawing its data from a sample of work release facility inmates. The results fail to support legal deterrence as an explanation of offending for this sample but suggest the importance of extralegal consequences.

Stafford and Warr (1993) reconceptualized general and specific deterrence into a single theory in which people's tendencies to commit crimes are based on a combination of personal experiences and vicarious experiences with being punished and avoiding punishment. The authors make a significant contribution to the deterrence literature by considering the effect of punishment avoidance when testing deterrence theory. The present study tests the applicability of Stafford and Warr's reconceptualized theory. The results reveal only partial support for deterrence. We discuss the implications of our findings and make suggestions for future research on deterrence theory.

Stafford and Warr (1993) reconceptualized general and specific deterrence into a single theory in which people's tendencies to commit crimes are based on a combination of personal experiences and vicarious experiences with being punished and avoiding punishment. The authors make a significant contribution to the deterrence literature by considering the effect of punishment avoidance when testing deterrence theory. Despite the theoretical appeal of this model, few studies have assessed its empirical merit. The present study tests the applicability of Stafford and Warr's reconceptualized theory by examining people's intentions to drink and drive. The results reveal only partial support for deterrence. We offer suggestions on how future research can clarify why some findings are inconsistent with deterrence theory.

WHAT IS PUNISHMENT? The punishment of offenders is a central feature of our criminal justice system and highlights the coercive nature of criminal justice. This topic is of great concern to researchers, government officials, correctional employees, and the general public. These stakeholders have varying opinions pertaining to the proper use and justification of punishment. However, before a critical examination can take place, it is necessary to define punishment.