Cross-Jurisdictional Differences in Punitive Public Attitudes?

With more information the Dutch public becomes less punitive. However, recent studies showed a remaining punitiveness gap between the general public and judges, despite the provision of detailed case information. Moreover, it has been demonstrated that the Dutch public overestimates the courts’ punitiveness. This is not in line with studies abroad. These contradictions raise questions, on the one hand, about the possibility of actual cross jurisdictional differences, on the other hand, about methodological explanations. A limited set of survey questions from studies abroad was therefore replicated with a new Dutch public sample. It focused on questions and methodologies that produced findings most directly at odds with earlier studies in the Netherlands. Using the same measurement approach, findings abroad were reproduced with the new Dutch sample for perceptions of punitiveness of judges and the courts. Thus using a different methodology new findings support conclusions that are opposite to our earlier conclusions. On the other hand, also with methodologies that have produced opposite conclusions abroad, the Dutch public does remain more punitive than judges. In the discussion it is argued that some of the remaining contradictions may be perfectly reconcilable, as long as conclusions are stated in a qualified manner.