1998 TEXAS CRIME POLL
SECTION 1: THE 1998 SURVEY
The 1998 Texas Crime Poll involved a statewide telephone surveydesigned and commissioned by the Criminal Justice Center’s Survey ResearchProgram at Sam Houston State University. In that survey, conductedby Texas A&M University’s Public Policy Research Institute (PPRI) onbehalf of Sam Houston State University in July of 1998, a total of 548Texans were queried about their attitudes toward a wide variety of crimeand criminal justice issues. If you are interested in seeing thetechnical information describing the sample selection process, administrationof the survey instrument, and completion rates for interviews, you mayeither write or call the Survey Research Program at the address or numberlisted in the front of this report. This information can also beaccessed through the World Wide Web at http://www.cjcenter.org/cjcenter/research/srp/.
Included in this year’s survey were questions concerning:
• the extent of the public’s confidence in the criminal and juvenilejustice
systems and their components;
• how concerned people are about becoming the victim of crimes; and
• attitudes about the transfer of juvenile cases to the adult courts,people’s thoughts about the relationship between crime portrayed throughthe media and the actual rates of crime, and the use of the death penalty.
Several of the issues addressed this year were also included inthe Texas Crime Poll completed in 1978. Throughout this report, Texans’responses to the questions in this year’s survey will be reported alongwith a discussion of some of the more substantive findings regarding thedifferences between the attitudes and experiences reported in 1978. Itis important to note, however, that the data collected in this year’s surveysometimes involved different question wording. The 1978 data were alsocollected through a “mail survey” rather than through telephone interviews.Exact comparisons across the two samples, therefore, cannot always be made.
Table 1.1 provides descriptive information about the respondentsfrom
the 1998 survey. The largest proportion of this year’s respondentswere
between 40 and 49 years of age representing 23% of the total
sample. Eighteen- to 29-year-olds and 30- to 39-year-olds each represented
20%of the total sample. Respondents in the 60 years of age and
oldercategory comprised 19% of the sample while the remaining 18% were aged50
to 59.
Table 1.1 Characteristics of respondents
|
|
Total Respondents |
Percent of Total |
|
Age 18-29 |
109 108 124 96 104 |
20 20 23 18 19 |
|
Ethnicity White |
339 77 47 15 |
74 14 9 3 |
|
Gender Male |
259 255 |
53 47 |
|
Education Less than high school |
59 150 160 119 57 |
11 28 29 22 10 |
|
Household Income Less than $15,000 |
56 106 188 132 |
12 22 39 27 |
Seventy-four percent of the sample reported they were White,
14%Hispanic, and 9% Black/African-American. The remaining 3% reportedbeing
“other.” Compared with the 1990 census data, this year’s sampleunderrepresented
the minority ethnic populations in Texas. Censusdata show that 27% of
Texans are Hispanic and that 12% are Black/African-American. Accordingly,
any findings concerning differences across ethnic subgroupsreported in this
analysis should not be generalized beyond the sample includedin the 1998 Texas
Crime Poll.
Fifty-three percent of this year’s sample were male and 47% werefemale.
These figures differ slightly from 1990 census data for Texas,which reports 49%
of Texans are male and 51% are female. Once again,differences across
gender groups should not be generalized beyond thisyear’s sample.
Twenty-nine percent of this year’s sample had completed “somecollege”
course work. Twenty-eight percent had earned a high schooldiploma or
equivalent. Those respondents who reported a “less thanhigh school” level
of education represented 11% of the total. Collegegraduates comprised 22%
of total respondents with the remaining 10% reportingthat they completed some
level of graduate work.
The largest household income group (39%) represented in thisyear’s survey
is comprised of annual household incomes from $30,000 to$60,000. Those
households reporting an income greater than $60,000represented 27% of the
total, while households reporting under $15,000comprised only 12%. The
remaining 22% of the sample includes thosehouseholds reporting a $15,000 to
$30,000 annual household income. Both the education and income variables
cannot be compared to census figuresbecause of categories used to represent the
data; therefore, it is notpossible to exactly compare the sample distributions
with the populationmarginals for those characteristics.
Throughout this report, statements will sometimes be made aboutthe
differences in attitudes and opinions between different subgroups
ofTexans. Whenever such statements are made, the differences beingnoted
may or may not be identified as “significant.” Differencesidentified as
being “significant” have a high probability (chi-squaredvalues with p < or ?
.05) that they are not the product of chance, butare, instead, associated with
the subgroup characteristics being analyzed. In such cases, readers can
access the statistical information used to determinetheir significance levels
by directly contacting the Survey Research Programand requesting that it be
sent by mail. This information is alsoavailable through the World Wide
Web at http://www.cjcenter.org/cjcenter/research/srp/.
SECTION 2: CONFIDENCE IN THE CRIMINAL AND JUVENILE JUSTICESYSTEMS AND
THEIR COMPONENTS
This section of questions in the 1998 Texas Crime Poll was designed
to assess Texans’ confidence in agencies which share responsibilityfor dealing
with crime and juvenile delinquency. Respondents wereasked how confident
they were with a total of ten different criminal/juvenilejustice agencies
representing both state and local levels. They werealso asked about their
general familiarity with the “criminal justice system”and the “juvenile justice
system.”
Table 2.1 presents a listing of the agencies included in thesurvey and
shows how much confidence Texans have in each of the individualcomponents of
the criminal and juvenile justice systems. The vast majorityof Texans have “a
great deal” or “some” confidence in both their localpolice department (83%) and
the Texas Department of Public Safety (86%). As has been the case in previous
Texas Crime Polls, the 1998 sample ofTexans were overwhelmingly more confident
in law enforcement than any othercomponent of the system. The local adult
court system received thesecond highest level of confidence (67%) which is
similar to past polls.
Table 2.1 Confidence in the criminal and juvenile justice systemsand their components
Question:
How much confidence do you have in _____ (components weredescribed and
inserted
in
a random order)?
Percent
responding
|
Component of the
system “A
great deal” or “Little”
or “no” “Don’t
know” Law Enforcement Courts Probation and Parole Corrections System as a whole |
Fifty-seven percent of the respondents had “a great deal” or “some”confidence
in adult prisons within the state, but nearly one-half (48%)expressed “little”
or “no” confidence in the adult parole system. Furthermore,both the local
probation and state parole components of the justice system,at both adult and
juvenile levels, received low levels of reported confidence. It is worth
noting, however, that approximately one-fifth of the respondents“don’t know” or
refused to state their level of confidence in local adultprobation (17%), local
juvenile probation (20%), and state juvenile parole(20%). Finally, Texans
report lower levels of confidence in the agenciesdealing with juveniles (as
opposed to adults) across all components ofthe system as well as the system as
a whole.
Statistical tests show that White respondents were significantlymore
likely to express “a great deal” or “some” confidence in their localpolice
department, the DPS, the local adult court system, and the adultprison system
than were Hispanics, Black/African-Americans and people from“other” ethnic
groups. Additionally, those with a high school educationor less are more
likely to have “little” or “no” confidence in the DPSthan those who have some
college education or beyond. Finally, femaleswere significantly less
likely than males to express confidence in theadult criminal justice system.
Texans’ confidence in the criminal and juvenile justice systemscan be
further examined by analysis of whether or not their reported familiaritywith
the systems and their individual components is associated withhow much
confidence they have in the components. In order to ascertainthe
respondent’s familiarity with the system’s components, the followingquestion
was asked, “How familiar are you with… (each of the 12 agenciesbeing examined
was listed in random order by the interviewers)?” Respondents were
prompted to report if they were “intimately familiar”(know many details about
the institution’s operation and organization),“ broadly familiar” (know some
details about the institution’s operationand organization), “familiar” (know
about the institution's operation andorganization in general terms), “somewhat
familiar” (know very little aboutthe institution’s operation and organization
beyond location, name, etc.),or “not familiar” (no knowledge at all) with each
component of the twosystems. Table 2.2 shows the association between “familiarity
with thesystem” and a person’s level of confidence in the systems and their
components.For ease in presentation, the sample was grouped into those who
reportedsome level of familiarity and those who reported “not familiar.” Table
2.2 also shows how many people report having some level of familiaritywith each
of the components. Respondents reporting “don’t know” orwho refused to
answer the familiarity question were excluded from furtheranalysis.
Table 2.2 Confidence in criminal and juvenile justice system components
by
those who are familiar with the individual component
|
Familiarity with: (% of respondents) |
“A great deal or some” |
“Little or none” |
“Don’t know/Refused” |
|
Law Enforcement |
85 71 89 72 |
14 24 10 21 |
1 5 1 7 |
|
Courts |
73 57 59 47 |
26 33 34 36 |
1 10 7 17 |
|
Probation and Parole |
57 55 35 48 38 51 36 |
35 39 36 39 46 50 40 41 |
8 22 9 26 6 13 10 24 |
|
Corrections |
61 54 51 37 |
37 35 38 38 |
2 11 11 25 |
|
System as a whole |
67 53 55 44 |
31 38 40 38 |
2 9 5 19 |
The figures in Table 2.2 clearly show that citizens who are
mostfamiliar with the system are likely to have the highest levels of
confidencein the systems and their components. Statistical tests show
thatin all cases, those respondents who are familiar with the system’s
componentswere significantly more likely to state that they have “some” or “a
greatdeal” of confidence in the systems and their components. It is also clearthat
people are considerably more familiar with the law enforcement componentsthan
any other parts of the criminal or juvenile justice systems. For example,
89% of the sample said that they had some level of familiaritywith their local
police departments compared with only 33% claiming somelevel of familiarity
with the juvenile parole system. In general,people were also less
familiar with the juvenile justice system than theywere with the adult system.
Additional statistical tests were conducted on the 1998 sampleto
determine if any significant differences in the levels of familiarityreported
by the different demographic groups in Table 1.1 could be found. Hispanics
and Black/African-Americans were significantly less likely toreport familiarity
with their local police department, DPS, adult courtsystem, and the adult
prison system than were Whites and “others.” Males were more likely to
report familiarity with their local police department,the DPS, the local adult
and juvenile court systems, the state adult andjuvenile prison systems, the adult
parole system, and both the criminaland juvenile justice systems as a whole.
The figures in Table 2.3 report the association between systemcontact
and level of confidence. Also reported in Table 2.3are the
percentages of the total sample reporting whether or not they hadany contact
with the components. Whether or not the respondents hadcontact with the
criminal or juvenile justice systems in general was notasked.
Table 2.3 Confidence in the system and whether or not respondentshad
any
direct contact with the component
Percent responding (may not totall 100 due to rounding error)
|
Contact with: |
"A great deal or "some" |
"Little or none" |
"Don't know/refused" |
|
Law Enforcement |
84 84 91 83 |
16 15 7 14 |
1 1 2 3 |
|
Courts |
82 64 65 51 |
16 31 35 35 |
2 5 0 14 |
|
Probation and Parole |
77 44 70 41 54 41 70 41 |
23 38 27 38 40 48 20 40 |
0 18 3 21 6 10 10 19 |
|
Corrections |
71 56 56 43 |
27 37 38 37 |
2 7 6 20 |
Table 2.3 clearly shows that the majority of Texans who have haddirect
agency contact express “a great deal” or “some” confidence in thatparticular
component of the system. Comparing the percentages ofpeople expressing
confidence in the components of the system across Table2.1 and Table 2.3 shows
that in several cases, contact with the agencyincreases the respondent’s level
of confidence in that component. For example, Table 2.1 shows that only
46% of the total sample reportedhaving “some” or “a great deal” of confidence
in the adult probation systemcompared with 77% of those respondents who had
direct contact with theadult probation system during the past year.
Additional statistical tests were conducted on the 1998 sampleto
determine if any significant differences in the levels of contact reportedby
the different demographic groups in Table 1.1 could be found. Those
respondents who reported being White and having an annual householdincome over
$30,000 were significantly more likely to report direct contactwith their local
police department than were non-Whites and those withan annual household
income under $30,000. Males were also significantlymore likely than
females to report direct contact with their local policedepartment, local
criminal court system, and adult probation system.
SECTION 3: FEAR OF CRIME AND LIKELIHOOD
OF CRIMINAL VICTIMIZATION
The next section of the 1998 survey examined citizens’ concernsabout
becoming the victim of a crime and was constructed to allow somecomparisons to
be made between citizens’ concerns today compared with theconcerns expressed by
a sample of Texans included in the 1978 Texas CrimePoll. Table 3.1
includes comparative figures showing how many peoplefelt that they would become
the victim of crimes during the year followingthe survey. Table 3.1 also
shows the proportion of respondents ineach year who felt that they would become
the victim of any of the crimesduring the next year. This measure represents
an overall indicatorof how concerned people were about becoming a crime victim.
Table 3.1 Percent of respondents reporting fear of becomingthe victim
of
crimes during the next year: 1978 vs. 1998
Question:
Do you feel you may be the victim of any of the following
crimes
between now and the next 12 months? What about (crimes were
asked
in random order)? (Table reports percent of people responding
“yes”
to the questions.)
|
Fear of becoming the victim of: Rape Fear of becoming the victim of any of the above |
1978
7 19 7 8 34 35 19 33 not asked 2
57
|
1998
5 20 12 14 24 31 23 25 6 not asked
59
|
The data represented in Table 3.1 clearly show that over the pasttwenty
years, there has been relatively little change in the overall levelof fear
people have about becoming the victim of the particular crimesincluded in the
surveys. Fifty-nine percent of this year’s sampleexpressed fear that they
would become the victim of at least one of thecrimes listed in 1998 compared
with 57% of the 1978 sample. A closeexamination of the figures concerning
each of the individual categoriesof crime shows that, while the overall level
of fear may be the same, today’scitizens are considerably more afraid of
personal violent crimes than werethose included in the 1978 study. In
1978, only 7% of the samplefelt that they would become the victim of an unarmed
assault. Thisfigure almost doubled in 1998 with 12% of the sample expressing
such afear. Similarly, the number of people thinking they might becomethe
victim of an armed assault jumped from 8% in 1978 to 14% in 1998. These
increases were offset by a 10% decrease in the number of Texans whoreport being
afraid that they will become the victim of a burglary.
Statistical tests were conducted on the 1998 sample and showthat males
were significantly more likely than females to report fear thatthey would
become the victim of vandalism and assault with a weapon. Also,
significantly more males than females reported fear of becoming thevictim of
one of the crimes included in the survey. Black/African-Americanand
Hispanic respondents were significantly more likely to report fearof becoming
the victim of an arson during the next 12 months as were respondentsfalling
into the lowest income group. When looking at the generalfear of becoming
the victim of a crime, however, White and Hispanic respondentswere
significantly more likely than Black/African-Americans to report fearthat they
would become the victim of at least one of the crimes listed.
Another measure of how fearful people are of crime can be determinedby
examining whether or not people are afraid where they live because ofconcerns
about becoming the victim of a crime. In both 1978 and 1998,Texans were
asked whether or not there was any area within a mile of theirhomes where they
would be afraid to walk alone at night. Both surveysalso included a
question designed to measure how fearful people were ofbeing in their own homes
alone at night. The results from these questionsare reported in Table
3.2. Since the 1978 report included a listingof responses to these
questions by gender and ethnic group membership,the comparative figures for the
1998 sample are also reported in Table3.2.
In 1998, considerably fewer Texans were afraid of walking alonein their
neighborhoods or being alone in their homes at night than theywere in
1978. Only about one-third of the 1998 sample reported livingwithin a
mile of an area they would be afraid of walking in at nighttimecompared with
over one-half of the 1978 sample. Similarly, only 21%of the 1998 sample
reported that they were afraid of being alone in theirown homes at night
compared with 46% of the 1978 sample. Women andBlack/African-American
respondents appear to be considerably less afraidof being alone in their own
homes today than they were in 1978. Today,women also seem to be less
afraid of walking alone near their homes atnight than they were in 1978.
Table 3.2 Fear of walking within one mile of home at nightand fear
of
being alone in own home at night: 1978 vs. 1998
Questions:
Is there any area within one mile of your home where
you
would be afraid to walk alone at night because of crime? (Table
shows
percent responding “yes”), and Would you say you are afraid to
be
in your home at night always, most of the time, sometimes or
never?
(Table shows percent responding “sometimes, most of the time,
or
always.”)
|
Fear of walking alone at night White Sometimes, most of the time, or always afraid of being alone in ownhouse
at night. White |
1978 54 54 46 44 |
1998 33 30 21 17 |
There were no statistically significant differences in the waythe 1998 sample responded to the question concerning fear of walking withina mile of their home based on their age, level of education, or ethnicbackground. Women in the 1998 sample were significantly more likelythan men to report living within a mile of an area they are afraid of walkingin at night. Women, people in the lower income groups, minority groupmembers, and younger people were significantly more likely to report thatthey sometimes felt afraid of being alone in their own homes at night.
SECTION 4: CURRENT ISSUES FACING THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
The final section of the 1998 survey included several questionsrelating to issues that are relevant to today’s Texans. Questionswere designed to provide information on what Texans think about: (1) whetheror not youths who are charged with crimes should be tried as adults orjuveniles; (2) the relationship between the media’s depiction of crimeand violence and the actual crime rate; and (3) the public’s position onthe death penalty. While each of these issues is particularly salientto the citizenry in 1998, the latter two were also of interest to the publicin 1978 as questions focusing on media and crime as well as the death penaltywere included in that year’s Texas Crime Poll. When discussing thefindings of the 1998 survey, comparative figures from the 1978 survey willalso be presented when they are available.
SHOULD JUVENILE OFFENDERS BE TRIED AS ADULTS?
Table 4.1 includes figures showing how respondents to the 1998survey
answered two questions aimed at determining whether or not (andat what age)
Texans would favor trying juvenile offenders in adult courts. Sixty-nine
percent of the respondents stated that they thought juvenilescharged with
property crimes should be tried as adults, and 88% favoredhandling juvenile
offenders charged with personal violent crimes as adults.More than one-half of
the respondents would recommend waiting until juvenilescharged with any type of
crime had reached the age of 15 before tryingthem as adults. Slightly more than
one-third (33%) of the respondents supportedtrying juveniles as young as 13 years
old who have been charged with personalviolent crimes as adults (see Appendix
material for further breakdown ofrecommended ages).
Table 4.1 Texans’ Views on Trying Juveniles as Adults
Questions: Do you feel that a juvenile charged with a ______should be tried in an adult court, depending on his or her age? (Interviewersinserted “property crime” and “personal violent crime” in the question.) If the respondent said “yes,” they were asked “at what age?”
Percent responding:
|
|
Yes |
No |
Don’t know/Refused |
|
Property Crimes |
69 Median age recommended = 15 |
27 |
4 |
|
Personal Violent Crimes |
88 Median age recommended = 15 |
|
3 |
Statistical tests were conducted to determine whether ornot there were any significant associations between the demographic statusof the respondents and their position on the handling of juvenile offenders. The figures reported in the Appendix show that there are no significantdifferences in the way Texans from any of the demographic groups thinkabout this issue. Regardless of the respondent’s age, gender, ethnicstatus, income, or education, approximately the same proportions recommendtrying juveniles as adults.
CRIME AND THE MEDIA
It is interesting to note that the current concerns about therelationship
between crime and violence in the media and the rate of crimein society is not
only a current topic but was also of interest in 1978. The 1998 survey
included three questions designed to determine how closelyassociated people
think the media’s portrayal of crime and violence iswith the actual rates of
crime. Two of these questions focused onthe depiction of crime and
violence on television and in the movies, bothof which were also asked in the
1978 survey. The 1998 sample wasalso asked how much of a relationship
they thought there was between songsdepicting crime and violence and the actual
rates of crime.
Table 4.2 shows the percent of Texans in 1978 and 1998 who thoughtthat
the media portrayal of crime and violence caused a large increasein the crime
rate. What is most noteworthy about these findings is thedramatic increase in
the number of Texans who think there is a direct relationshipbetween media depiction
of crime and violence and the actual crime rate. In 1978, only a little
more than one-quarter of the respondents thoughtthat either movie or television
violence was causing a large increase inthe crime rate. In 1998, these
figures almost doubled with 47% ofthe respondents reporting that showing crime
and violence in movies causesthere to be a large increase in the actual rate of
crime, and 48% reportsimilar beliefs about the depiction of crime and violence
on television. Thirty-six percent of the 1998 sample seem to have similar
views aboutthe music media.
Table 4.2 Opinions regarding crime and violence in the
media:
1978 vs. 1998
Questions: Do you think that crime and violence shownon ______ (interviewers inserted “television” first, followed by “movies”)have caused a large increase in the crime rate, caused a moderate increasein the crime rate, caused very little increase in the crime rate, or hadno effect on the crime rate? and Do you think that songs about crime andviolence have caused . . .? (Table shows percent of respondents who responded“caused a large increase in the crime rate.”)
Percent
reporting that media depiction of crime
and violence have caused a large increasein the
crime rate
|
1978 1998 |
Younger people were significantly less likely to associate anyof the different media with crime rates than were older people. Forexample, only 32% of the 18- to 29-year-olds in the 1998 sample thoughtthere was a large increase in the crime rates due to violence and crimein the movies compared to 55% of those who were 50 years of age or older. Similar statistically significant differences were found for televisionand music media as well. Black/African-Americans were also significantlyless likely to draw an association between the media’s portrayal of crimeand violence and changes in the crime rates. There were no statisticallysignificant associations across any of the other demographic groupings.
SUPPORT FOR THE DEATH PENALTY
Whether or not people support the use of the death penalty hasalways been
of interest, and the figures reported in Table 4.3 show thatin the 1998
survey, 83% supported its use compared to 79% in 1978. Direct
comparisons across the twenty year period cannot be made, however,because the
exact question wording used to collect these data was not thesame for both
years. In 1978, respondents were asked, “Are you infavor of the death
penalty being available for the following crimes (sixcrimes were mentioned, one
of which was murder).” In 1998, the respondentswere asked, “Do you
support the death penalty for the crime of murder?” The apparent
differences across the two years could be attributed to differencesin the
question wording.
Table 4.3 Support for the death penalty: 1978 vs. 1998
Texans
supporting the death penalty for the crime
of murder (percentages)
|
1978 1998 |
Recent attention has been given to whether or not Texans supportthe use of the death penalty in cases involving women or juvenile offenders. This year’s survey included two questions designed to address this issue. Table 4.4 shows how Texans responding to the 1998 survey felt about thesequestions. Clearly, the public’s support for the death penalty ingeneral is not affected by the gender of the murderer. Almost 80%of Texas’ citizens say they support the death penalty for women convictedof murder. Reflecting back on Table 4.3, 83% of the citizens supportedthe death penalty for murder without any mention of the gender of the convictedmurderer. The difference between these two figures is negligible.
Table 4.4 Support for the death penalty for women and juveniles
convicted
of murder (1998 sample only)
|
Percent who: Support Oppose Don’t know/Refused |
Women 79 17 4
|
Juveniles 49 42 9
|
When asked whether or not juveniles convicted of murder shouldbe given
the death penalty, the level of public support for the sanctionclearly
diminishes. Only 49% of those surveyed believed that juvenilesshould be
given this sanction while 42% clearly opposed its use. Among those who did
support the use of the death penalty for juvenilesconvicted of murder, the most
frequently mentioned “minimum age” for itsuse was 16 years old, representing
13% of those who support the death penaltyfor juveniles and identified a
minimum age for its application. Another13% were uncertain about a
minimum age and responded “don’t know” whenasked to specify one. While
some citizens say they are willing toexecute children five years old or younger
(5% of those who specified anage), most of the people supporting the use of the
death penalty wouldrestrict its use to 16- or 17-year-olds (45% of those
specifying an age). One-third of the respondents who suggested a minimum
age would be willingto apply the death sentence to juveniles 13 years of age or
younger.
Tests for statistically significant differences across demographicgroups
concerning the application of the death penalty to women or juvenilesshow that
in both cases women and Black/African-Americans are the leastlikely to support
the sanction’s use. Males, White respondents, andthose with the highest
levels of both income and education are the mostlikely to support the
application of the death penalty in cases involvingwomen or juvenile offenders.
Public opinion research has long demonstrated that people’s thoughtsabout
the use of the death penalty are not accurately measured throughthe use of
simple, single-focused questions such as those represented inTable 4.3 and
Table 4.4. Studies consistently show that people’ssupport for the death
penalty varies depending upon whether or not thereexists a “true life sentence
without the opportunity for parole” as analternative sanction. In order
to determine the “true” level of supportTexans have for the death penalty, all
respondents who initially said “yes”(n = 446) when asked “Do you support the
death penalty for the crime ofmurder?” were asked whether or not they would
continue to support the sanctionif a “true life sentence without the
possibility for parole” were available. A similar follow-up question was
asked of all respondents who initiallysaid “don’t know” or who refused to
answer the initial question (n=20).
Figures in Table 4.5 show that 73% of the respondents who
initiallysupported the death penalty continued their support, even with the
availabilityof a “true life sentence.” Twenty-eight percent of those who
wereinitially uncertain about their position shifted to support for the
deathpenalty after the follow-up question, and when combined, these respondentsrepresent
the “true death penalty supporters” who make up 60% of the entiresample.
Twenty-one percent of the respondents who initially supportedthe death penalty
said that they would be more likely to oppose its useif there were a “true life
sentence” as an option available, and another24% of those who were initially
uncertain became opposers after the follow-upquestion. Adding these two
groups to those who initially opposedthe death penalty shows that 31% of the
sample would oppose the death penaltyif there were a “true life sentence” as an
option. Nine percent of thesample remained uncertain about the death penalty,
even if there were a“true life sentence” available.
Table 4.5 Support for the death penalty vs. “life imprisonment
without
the possibility for parole” (1998 sample only)
Percent:
|
Original death penalty supporters Originally uncertain about the death penalty Texans’ true position on the death penalty if there were a “true lifesentence”
option |
Continuing to be death penalty supporters
73
28
True death penalty supporters
60
|
Shifting to be death penalty opposers
21
24 Would oppose the death penalty
31
|
Remaining uncertain about the death penalty
6
48
Uncertain about the death penalty
9
|
Statistical tests show that there are no significant differencesin the
levels of “true death penalty supporters” within the different educationand
gender groups. Older respondents, Whites and Hispanics, and respondentsfrom
the highest income groups were significantly more likely to be “truedeath
penalty supporters” than were respondents from other demographicgroups.
Table 4.6 shows whether or not people would support legislationdesigned
to establish a “true life sentence without the possibility forparole.”
Only 46% of Texans said they would support legislation replacingthe death
penalty with a “true life sentence,” while 74% would supportlegislation
creating a “true life sentence” while continuing to retainthe death penalty as
a sentencing option. White and Hispanic respondents,those respondents
with the highest levels of education, and those withthe lowest levels of income
were significantly more likely to support legislationthat would replace the
death penalty with a “true life sentence.” White respondents were also
significantly more likely to support legislationcreating a “true life sentence”
as an additional sanction while retainingthe death penalty as an option.
None of the other differences acrossthe different demographic groups were
statistically significant.
Table 4.6 Support for legislation establishing a sentenceof
“life
in prison without the possibility for parole”
(1998
sample only)
Questions: Would you support legislation that would substitutea sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole insteadof the death penalty? and Would you support legislation that would createa sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole in additionto keeping the death penalty?
|
Percent responding: |
Substitute life without parole instead of the death penalty |
Create life without parole as an option while retaining the deathpenalty |
|
No Don’t know/Refused |
46 48 6
|
74 21 5
|
APPENDIX MATERIAL
Appendix material can be accessed through the World Wide Web at http://www.cjcenter.org/cjcenter/research/srp/
or you may either writeor call the Survey Research Program at the address or
number listed inthe front of this report.
Appendix A includes a description of the sampling design.
Appendix B includes copies of all cross-tabulations used to determinethe
statistical significance of apparent associations between variables.