| This dissertation is composed of three studies investigating support for the death penalty and actual use of the death penalty. The first study examines support for the death penalty (and other harsh negative sanctions) by comparing five existing models of death penalty support (Deterrence, Symbolic, Retribution, Fear, and Exposure models) with a model derived from Social Dominance Theory (SDT). According to SDT, each of the existing models can be described as legitimizing beliefs, rationalizations used to justify support for the death penalty. A survey was constructed to assess all six models and was administered to 401 UCLA students. Structural equation modeling showed that an SD model incorporating existing models as legitimizing beliefs provided a good fit to the observed data, and fit better than any of the existing models.; The second study tested further predictions of Social Dominance Theory (SDT) called the Ideological Asymmetry Hypothesis. This hypothesis suggests that the strength of relationships among ideological beliefs and death penalty support should grow with increasing social status. Analysis of data from the Los Angeles County Social Survey revealed the pattern of ideological asymmetry predicted by the SD model.; The third study investigated the social factors which are related to the use of executions. SDT predicts that greater social hierarchy and greater acceptance of legitimizing beliefs (e.g. conservatism) should be related to greater execution use, all other things being equal. Execution Use in each of the 50 states of the United States since 1976 was predicted from ten variables, Social Hierarchy, Old Confederacy, Conservatism, Violent Crime, Income, Population, Population Density, Degree of Education, Proportion of Population who is White, and Proportion of Whites Murdered (out of all murders). Multiple regression analysis showed, consistent with the SD model, that Social Hierarchy and Conservatism was consistently related to execution use, after including all control variables. |
