Deterrence Theory

Deterrence Theory

Introduction

Deterrence is the straightforward, commonsense notion that if you do something wrong, you will be punished, and the punishment itself will prevent you from doing that wrong thing again. According to this notion, fear of a future punishment dictates the actions people choose. This way of thinking is commonplace, and it underpins much—if not most—political discourse and public policy debate. Moreover, it is a main-stay of American foreign military policy, implying to potential enemies that the wrong actions they take will incur the wrath of American military might.

Deterrence also plays a very important role in criminological empirical research. Empirical research in the area of deterrence is well elaborated in modern criminology. That research seeks to determine the accuracy of assumptions about deterrence and its effectiveness. Furthermore, it examines criminal punishment policy to see how adjusting levels and types of punishment practice may alter it to lower crime.

Discussion

Unfortunately, the production of reliable and valid empirical knowledge is a slow and laborious process. While criminology has begun that process in the area of deterrence, it has no final, definitive conclusions for the following core questions: (1) whether, when, and how deterrence “works” on the decision-making processes of individual human beings and (2) how to implement a public policy that affects individual choices to commit or not commit criminal acts.

There are two basic types of deterrence—general and specific. General deterrence is designed to prevent crime in the general population. Thus, the state's punishment of offenders serves as an example for others in the general population who has not yet participated in criminal events. It is meant to make them aware of the horrors of official sanctions in order to put them off committing crimes. Examples include the application of the death penalty and the use of corporal punishment.

Recent positive trends in both the levels of criminal activity and incarceration rates have motivated economists and other social scientists to reexamine the channels through which incentives impact criminal behavior. There has been an increase in criminal activity in the United States in recent decades. The number of violent crimes more than doubled between 1970 and 1998, reaching 1.5 million. Property crimes increased during the same period from 7.4 million to roughly 11 million. The number of people incarcerated in state and federal prisons increased from 290,000 in 1977 to more than 1.2 million in 1998. One reaction to the increased level of criminal behavior over time, despite increased incapacitation, is to question the importance of deterrence (e.g., arrests). Some social scientists have indicated that deterrence may have a limited impact on crime, especially for juvenile criminals, because habits and other social factors may be more significant for them. For example, as cited by DiIulio (1996), Wilson (1994) states that “[we need to understand] that people facing the same incentives often behave in characteristically different ways because they have been habituated to do so,” while “changing incentives will not alter the behavior of poorly habituated people as much as we would like, at least ...