Perceptions of the death penalty among citizens in Virginia State

RESEARCH DESIGN 11

Running head: RESEARCH DESIGN 1

Perceptions of the death penalty among citizens in Virginia State

Research Design

Introduction

The essence of this research design is to answer the following question: what is the citizen’s perception of electrocution is a method of execution for death row prisoners in Virginia? What are the implications of these perceptions in policy-making process? This section also presents a discussion of the research question, a theoretical perspective and literature review. There is also an explanation of the design used; the methodology applied, the data collection and analysis process, and ethical issues surrounding the research. Finally, the author presents a projected timeline of how the research will be undertaken. This research design is built on the research proposal with the following topic: an examination of the citizen’s perception of the electrocution as an execution method in Virginia.

Research Question

This study seeks to answer the following questions

What is the perception of Virginia citizens regarding the death penalty and particularly, the use of electrocution as a punishment for homicide?

Although there have been surveys regarding the public perception of the death penalty, most of these have not been specific on particular forms of execution. Moreover, there have been variations of such perceptions in different states. Various studies have been conducted by scholars, authors, and scientists regarding death penalty perceptions. For example, the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation examined various studies including those of Shepherd, Gittings, Rubin, Dezhbakhsh among others (deathpenaltyinfo.org, 2018). These authors offered a critique of these and more studies relating to the subject of the death penalty.

A 3-decade review by the National Research Council of the National Academies, and whose report was released in 2012 established that studies which laid a claim on the deterrent effect on the rates of murder were seriously flawed. The author’s conclusions from these observations were that until today, research about the impact of capital punishment on murder is not duly informative. In other words, there is no sufficient information from existing studies about the impact of capital punishment on murder. In particular, until today, there is no determination on whether capital punishment increased, decreases or poses no effect on murder rates. In this regard, the report by the National Research Council of the National Academies recommended that these studies ought to be used in informing decisions which require judgments concerning the impact of the death penalty on homicides. Consequently, claims postulating that research has highlighted that capital punishment increases or reduces murder rates by a specific degree ought not to influence policymakers concerning the issue of capital punishment. Instead, public support or lack of it for the policy should be the basis. Furthermore, many of the existing studies present unfounded evidence concerning the death penalty.

Three main flaws were found in the report by the National Research Council of the National Academies. The first is that many of the studies evaluated do not take into consideration the methods of execution and non-capital punishment which could be imposed on criminals. This second issue is that these studies are either implausible or incomplete models of the potentials murderers attitude of and the response to capital punishment. The third flaw was that the estimates of the impact of the capital punishment are chiefly based on the statistical models which instead of relying on credible and primary evidence depend on assumptions which may not be credible.

Literature Review Scope

Theoretical Perspective

Systems Theory and Thinking

There are two basic types of systems; open and closed. An open system identifies the dynamic interaction between the system and the environment. On the other hand, a closed system is one which is not influenced by their environment or its contexts and do not interact with it. Today, governments and organizations are called open systems since these have to consistent interacted with their contexts and environments which includes people. The government and even the criminal justice system is very much an open system since it has to be supported by citizens and its environment. If such support dwindles, then implementation of such a program becomes an uphill task. Comprehending those public perceptions and attitudes influence policy makers is important. These are required to operate within an “open system” In this case, therefore, it is important to understand the environment that is the public perceptions to inform policymakers and scholars on whether they are on the right track (Anderson, 1984)

An assessment of the political processes ought to establish institutional relationships and realities which are reflected in regular events. In this analysis, political processes need to be identified to aid an understanding of who, where and how policies are made and implemented. Also, this is important to identified the success factors in policy implementations. These factors include consensus, the rule of law, competition, inclusion and good governance. Consensus relates to the common agreements on the main tenets of the policy in question and whether there are political contexts played by such rules. The other questions to consider include agreements among citizens, and the legal ramifications of the given policy. Furthermore, regarding the policy under review, it is probable to identify the observance of human rights, legal structures for private and public interactions and activities and whether the rule of law is applied in a just and equal manner. What is more, it is critical to evaluate the independence of the judiciary and its integrity, whether similar cases produce similar outcomes (Ham, and Hill, 1984). These will greatly help in making an informed judgment on the viability of the policy in question.

Literature Review Scope

The global opinion of citizens on the death penalty has experienced drastic changes over the years. It has grown to become extinct in many nations in the world. Crimes which were punishable by death in the past such as blasphemy, adultery, questioning the government are no longer that serious. Blasphemy and adultery, for instance, are not crimes at all in the modern-day world and the free society (King 2017). Murder, however, is still as illegal as it was ten decades ago, but there has been a global shift in people’s perceptions of the kind of punishments that perpetrators receive. A substantial amount of studies has gathered information which portrays that there are varying degrees of support and opposition for this kind of penalty. A study by Simon (2017) on the perceptions of Americans on death stipulate that a majority of people in America support this penalty, but the level of support has since dropped by a considerable percentage since 2000 for various reasons.

In today’s society, people view death penalty from different angles, and this causes mixed reactions to this matter. However, it is evident that the support for death penalties has declined over the past few decades massively, due to how different social groups view capital punishment (Garrett 2017). A great percentage of those that support death penalty seem to support it only on the grounds that the accused had committed murder. These people still argue that there are not enough safeguards in the justice system to prevent innocent people from being convicted. This view is consistent remarkably among all groups of people, even though solid divides exist between different races and different political beliefs. Regardless of all other disputes over the penalty, all indication points out that everyone believes that the justice system around the globe cannot be trusted and as such, innocent people and the minority, which in this case include the poor, may get executed.

Additionally, most people tend to believe that the death penalty costs four times as much as compared to life imprisonment. Several studies have shown that death penalties require a lot of capital, which could otherwise be used on other things to benefit the nation. The studies further assert that many people tend to think that the ability to take a life lies only with God and that there are other ways to punish lawbreakers other than death since it is wrong to take life. Another percentage cited that religions recognize God as the only one with the power to punish and for that reason punishment should be left to Him. The death penalty is, therefore, more culturally than legally ingrained in most people and while it may remain relatively supported in some levels, it masks some deep opposition in most places around the globe (Alvarez., & Miller, 2017).

There is also a difference in perception between learned people and those who did not attend school. This is an area with the biggest split especially considering people who went to college tend to think that death penalty is imbalanced racially, and may be seen as a way to revenge as opposed to people who don’t have a college education (Simon 2017). For people who are not learned, tit for tat is no big deal, but for the learned ones, death penalty carries a significant meaning other than just a form of punishment.

Strong public support for capital punishment is considered to be the key reason why the death penalty continues to be applied as correctional measures for capital offenses within the U.S criminal system. Nonetheless, various cases and court rulings have provided a different trajectory for the said policy in the criminal justice system. For instance, in the supreme case involving Georgia v Furman (1972), the court noted that the death penalty was a direct violation of the 8th amendment to the US constitution. Apart from this punishment being cruel, it was also unusual or peculiar in the constitution. The juries made this decision because of the significant level of deterioration for public support for this policy of death penalty. In a typical sense, the decline of public support was considered to be a measure of “evolving or emerging standards of decency.” The judge argued that if specific information about the death penalty was forwarded to the citizens and requires them to give their views; they would nonetheless consider them to be both unconstitutional and immoral (Falco and Freiburger, 2011). This is a confirmation of the high level of influence for public opinion and support towards implementation of a given policy. On the other hand, those who support the policy do not have clear information concerning the decency of this policy.

Research Design

According to Birks and Malhotra (2000), a research design can either be categorized as explorative or conclusive. For the current study, the researcher opts to employ an exploratory methodology in which he anticipates it will enable her to retrieve sufficient information about the subject. The approach is also anticipated to provide a basis for establishing formalized research plans. Particularly, when the current exploratory research recognizes the influence of citizen’s perception and attitudes in policy formation and implementation, descriptive research will then be followed in targeting individual members, thus reinforcing the efficiency of the study outcomes. The approach will be deployed during the first phases of the decision making processes in making evaluations of the contexts within a limited cost and time. It is anticipated that this study from greatly benefits from a wide range of versatility and approach in the prelude investigations. Moreover, these explorations will as well rely on both primary and secondary data obtained from past studies.

The researcher will as well survey public perceptions for the death penalty in Virginia State. Particularly, the survey will be conducted in the following towns; Alexandria, Hampton, and Richmond. The researcher believes that this represents a more balanced representation of the rest of population in Virginia County. In obtaining these views, the researcher will use questionnaires to obtain the views of respondents from the study location. Some of the benefits anticipated from this methodology include the possibility of representing a larger population, the low cost of such design, and the relevance of the statistics (Hennink et al 2010). However, one of the weaknesses of using surveys is that they may be challenging when evaluating controversial issues as what this research intends to cover. In particular, there is a potential of having questions which may be perceived as inappropriate by some respondents. Furthermore, the design used is inflexible and will remain fixed in the entire process of data collection. This means that there will be no flexibility in going outside the topic.

For the interview process, the interview will be scheduled at the interviewee’s residency or workplace on a daily basis for two weeks. For those who prefer the interview to be carried out at their workplace, the timeline will be when they are in break time or when their time is up.

Data collection

The study intends to employ primary and secondary methods in data collection. The use of secondary will to majorly complement the primary data employed obtained from the field survey. The data will be sourced from journals, academic databases, newspaper articles, government and organizational websites. In primary data, the researchers will rely on questionnaires which will be carrying both qualitative and quantitative means of obtaining the information. This means that the questionnaire will be both structured and unstructured. The questionnaire will be distributed to research participants with the aid of the research assistants. Furthermore, an interview session will be prepared both a clique of citizens and key policymakers.

Materials

The questionnaire and interview guides will be the main materials for data collection. Respondents will be required to fill in the questionnaire and respond to the questions in the interview guide. The data from the questionnaire and interview guide will be compared accordingly. The data collection process will take two weeks. A participant will be given the questionnaire and be required to fill and submit immediately.

Data Analysis Procedure

Primary data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics while the qualitative data will be analyzed using thematic and content analysis. Quantitative data will be coded into the Statistical Package for Social Scientists. The frequencies will then be used in making the analysis.

Sample size

A simple random sampling technique will be employed in obtaining participants for the study. A total of 50 participants both male and female will be selected. Out of the 50 participants, 10 of them will be policy makers constituting a member of parliaments, lawyers, political analysis, constitutional experts, and key government employees.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Those to be considered include adults who are 18 years and above. These are believed to comprehend their environment and more importantly what is happening in the political arena. Furthermore, individuals selected must fully give consent to participate in the study. Otherwise, those who are uncomfortable will be excluded from the study.

Study site

The study will be carried out in Virginia State Australia. The specific towns where the study will be undertaken include Alexandria, Hampton, and Richmond. This region was selected owing to its controversial laws and implementation of electrocution as a death punishment for capital offenses.

The significance of the study

It is hoped that findings from this research will be of benefit to policymakers, politicians, government officials and the criminal justice system in comprehending the support level of the specific policy in question. Researchers will also be triggered to conduct more studies related to the issue. Since this study is conducted in only one state, Virginia, there is a need for similar studies to be conducted in other states as well and compared the outcome for an informed decision-making process of the subject. Moreover, the study will as well be an essential addition of the extant knowledge regarding the context of the study.

Ethical Consideration

Research ethics are majorly about an analysis of various ethical issues that are likely to arise in the course of the research (Hennink et al 2010). Research ethics are instituted to safeguard participants against possible risks so that their welfare is protected. Apart from each participant being required to sign consent forms, the researcher will endeavor to explain the purpose of the research to each respondent as well as the likely benefits and risks associated with the process. Furthermore, they will be assured of the privacy and safety of the information they provide. The inclusion of their names will be an optional choice for all respondents. Moreover, the research will adhere to the institutional research ethics and protocols. This means that all principles and ethical guidelines will be followed accordingly. All those taking part in the study, plus the local and state authorities will be informed accordingly. The research will only proceed once permission has been granted from these authorities. Sources used from outside will be acknowledged accordingly.

Time Schedule

Activity

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar

Writing of the Proposal w

Collecting the Data

Analyzing the Data

Compiling and editing the thesis

Final Submission

Conclusion

Public perceptions play an important role in how a policy is viewed or made. Opinions on the role and use of public perception in forming or changing policy can be wide-ranged as the opinions themselves. In fact, public opinion harbors the capability of changing the course of history. Authorities must always seek ways of involving the public in policy formation and implementation in both the open data agenda and in transparency perspectives. In this perspective, public leaders, policymakers and the criminal justice system are required to make better use of public opinions in achieving the set objectives of the set policy. Public opinions and perceptions is a critical aspect of setting the pace of reforms. It is important that the existing policy fully aligns with public opinions. In this way, the policy in place will receive greater support, and its implementation will be more effective as the hurdles are reduced.

References

Anderson J. (1984). Public Policy-Making (3rd Edition), Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York:

USA.

Deathpenaltyinfo.org. (2018). Discussion of the recent deterrent studies. Available at:

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/discussion-recent-deterrence-studies(Accessed on 18th April, 2018)

Falco, D. L., & Freiburger, T. L. (2011). Public Opinion and the Death Penalty: A Qualitative

Approach. The Qualitative Report, 16(3), 830-847. Retrieved from ://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol16/iss3/11

Ham C. and Hill M. (1984). The Policy Process in the Modern Capitalist State. Harvester

Wheatsheaf: London.

Hennink, M., Hutter, I. and Bailey, A. (2010). Qualitative research methods. Sage:UK

Malhotra, NK & Birks, DF 2000. Marketing Research. An Applied Approach, European

Edition, Prentice Hall: London

Nagin, D., and Pepper, J. (2012).Deterrence and the Death Penalty, Committee on Law and

Justice at the National Research Council, April 2012.

Vergano, D. (2012). “NRC: Death penalty effect research ‘fundamentally flawed’,” USA Today,

April 18, 2012.