Pitfalls in the Use of Time Series Methods to Study Deterrence and Capital Punishment

Journal of Quantitative Criminology - Tập 29 - Trang 45-66 - 2012
Kerwin Kofi Charles1, Steven N. Durlauf2
1University of Chicago, Chicago, USA
2Department of Economics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, (USA)

Tóm tắt

Evaluate the use of various time series methods to measure the deterrence effect of capital punishment. The analysis of the time series approach to deterrence is conducted at two levels. First, the mathematical foundations of time series methods are described and the link between the time series properties of aggregate homicide and execution series and individual decision making is developed. Second, individual studies are examined for logical consistency. The analysis concludes that time series methods used to study the deterrence effects of capital punishment suffer from fundamental limitations and fail to provide credible evidence. The common limitation of these studies is their lack of attention to identification problems. Suggestions are made as to directions for future work that may be able to mitigate the weaknesses of the current literature. Time series studies of capital punishment suffer from sufficiently serious identification problems that existing empirical findings are compatible with either the presence or the absence of a deterrent effect.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Angrist J, Kuersteiner G (2011) Causal effects of monetary policy shocks: semiparametric conditional independence tests with multinomial propensity score. Rev Econ Stat 93(3):725–747 Arendt H (1977) Eichmann in Jerusalem. New York: Penguin Books. (Revision of 1963 1st edn) Ash R, Gardner M (1975) Topics in stochastic processes. Academic Press, Orlando Bailey W (1998) Deterrence, brutalization and the death penalty: another reexamination of Oklahoma’s return to capital punishment. Criminology 36:711–733 Becker G (1968) Crime and punishment: an economic analysis. J Polit Econ 78:169–217 Becsi Z (1999) Economics and crime in the states. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. Econ Rev Q1:38–49 Blumstein A, Cohen J, Nagin D (1978) Deterrence an incapacitation: estimating the effects of criminal sanctions on crime rates, report of the panel on deterrence and incapacitation, National Academy of Sciences. National Academy Press, Washington DC Cloninger D (1992) Capital punishment and deterrence: a portfolio approach. Appl Econ 24:645–655 Cloninger D, Marchesini R (2001) Execution and deterrence: a quasi-controlled group experiment. Appl Econ 33:569–576 Cloninger D, Marchesini R (2006) Execution moratoriums, commutations, and deterrence: the case of Illinois. Appl Econ 38:967–973 Cochran J, Chamblin M, Seth M (1994) Deterrence or brutalization? an impact assessment of Oklahoma’s return to capital punishment. Criminology 32:107–134 Dezhbakhsh H, Rubin P, Shepherd J (2003) Does capital punishment have a deterrent effect? new evidence from postmoratorium panel data. Am Law Econ Rev 5:344–376 Donohue J, Wolfers J (2005) Uses and abuses of empirical evidence in the death penalty debate. Stanf Law Rev 58:791–846 Durlauf S, Nagin D (2010) The deterrent effect of imprisonment. In: Cook P, Ludwig J, McCrary J (eds) Controlling crime: strategies and payoffs. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (forthcoming) Durlauf S, Johnson P, Temple J (2006) Growth econometrics. In: Aghion P, Durlauf S (eds) Handbook of economic growth. Amsterdam: North Holland Durlauf S, Kourtellos A, Tan CM (2008) Are any growth theories robust?. Econ J 118:329–346 Durlauf S, Navarro S, Rivers D (2010) Understanding aggregate crime regressions. J Econ 158:306–317 Ehrlich I (1975a) The deterrent effect of capital punishment: a question of life and death. Am Econ Rev 65:397–417 Ehrlich I (1975b) Deterrence, evidence, and inference. Yale Law J 85:2209–2227 Granger C (1969) Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica 37:424–438 Grogger J (1990) The deterrent effect of capital punishment: an analysis of daily homicide counts. J Am Stat Assoc 85:295–303 Hamilton J (1994) Time series analysis. Princeton University Press, Princeton Hjalmarsson R (2009) Does capital punishment have a “local” deterrent effect on homicides? Am Law Econ Rev 11:310–324 Kessler D, Levitt S (1999) Using sentence enhancements to distinguish between deterrence and incapacitation. J Law Econ 42:343–363 Land K, Teske R, Zheng H (2009) The short run effects of executions on homicides: deterrence, displacement or both? Criminology 47:501–536 Leamer E (1985) Vector autoregressions for causal inference? Carnegie-Rochester Conf Ser Public Policy 22:255–303 Lee D, McCrary J (2009) The deterrent effect of prison: dynamic theory and evidence. Department of Economics, Princeton University (unpublished manuscript) Leeper E, Zha T (2003) Modest policy interventions. J Monet Econ 50:1673–1700 Leeper E, Sims C, Zha T (1996) What does monetary policy do? (with discussion). Brookings Pap Econ Act 2:1–78 Leeper E, Walker T, Yang S-C (2008) Fiscal foresight: analytics and econometrics. NBER Working Paper no. 2008 Liebman J, Fagan J, West V (2000) Capital attrition: error rates in capital cases, 1973–1995. Texas Law Rev 78:1839–1861 Lucas R (1976) Econometric policy evaluation: a critique. Carnegie-Rochester Ser Public Policy 1:19–46 Marvell T, Moody C (1994) Prison population growth and crime reduction. J Quant Criminol 10:109–140 Phillips D (1980) The deterrent effect of capital punishment: new evidence on an old controversy. Am J Sociol 86:139–148 Phillips D (1982) Deterrence and the death penalty: reply to Zeisel. Am J Sociol 88:170–172 Roberts S (2001) The brother. Random House, New York Sargent T (1987) Macroeconomic theory. Academic Press, San Diego Sims C (1972) Money, income, and causality. Am Econ Rev 62:540–552 Sims C (1980) Macroeconomics and reality. Econometrica 48:1–48 Sims C (1982) Policy analysis with econometric models. Brookings Pap Econ Act 1:107–152 Sims C (1992) Interpreting the macroeconomic time series facts. Eur Econ Rev 36:975–1000 Spelman W (2000) What recent studies do (and don’t) tell us about imprisonment and crime. In: Tonry M (ed) Crime and justice: a review of research vol. 27. University of Chicago Press, Chicago Stolzenberg L, D’Alessio S (2004) Capital punishment, execution publicity, and murder in Houston, Texas. J Crim Law Criminol 94:351–379 Zeisel H (1982) Disagreement over the evaluation of a controlled experiment. Am J Sociol 88:378–389 Zimring F, Fagan J, Johnson D (2010) Executions, deterrence, and homicide: a tale of two cities. J Empir Leg Stud 7:1–29