Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
M. Levi, Shayne Jones (1985)
PUBLIC AND POLICE PERCEPTIONS OF CRIME SERIOUSNESS IN ENGLAND AND WALESBritish Journal of Criminology, 25
D. Parton, M. Hansel, J. Stratton (1991)
MEASURING CRIME SERIOUSNESS Lessons from the National Survey of Crime SeverityBritish Journal of Criminology, 31
L. Wilkins (1991)
Punishment, Crime and Market Forces
J. Sellin, M. Wolfgang (1965)
The measurement of delinquencyAmerican Sociological Review, 30
C. Corbett, F. Simon (1991)
POLICE AND PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF THE SERIOUSNESS OF TRAFFIC OFFENCESBritish Journal of Criminology, 31
Sandra Evans, Joseph Scott (1984)
The Seriousness of Crime Cross‐Culturally:Criminology, 22
G. Gescheider, E. Catlin, Anne Fontana (1982)
Psychophysical measurement of the judged seriousness of crimes and severity of punishmentsBulletin of the psychonomic society, 19
M. Walker (1978)
MEASURING THE SERIOUSNESS OF CRIMESBritish Journal of Criminology, 18
V. Hamilton, Steve Rytina (1980)
Social Consensus on Norms of Justice: Should the Punishment Fit the Crime?American Journal of Sociology, 85
L. Sebba, G. Nathan (1984)
FURTHER EXPLORATIONS IN THE SCALING OF PENALTIESBritish Journal of Criminology, 24
R. Teghtsoonian, S. Stevens, G. Stevens (1975)
Psychophysics: Introduction to Its Perceptual, Neural and Social Prospects
P. Rossi, E. Waite, Christine Bose, Richard Berk (1974)
THE SERIOUSNESS OF CRIMES: NORMATIVE STRUCTURE AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES*American Sociological Review, 39
R. Fox, A. Freiberg (1990)
Ranking offence seriousness in reviewing statutory maximum penaltiesAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 23
M. Lodge (1981)
Magnitude Scaling: Quantitative Measurement of Opinions
A. Taylor (1968)
Brief Criminal Attitude ScaleJournal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 59
Mark Warr, R. Meier, M. Erickson (1983)
Norms, theories of punishment, and publicly preferred penalties for crimes.Sociological Quarterly, 24
One hundred and fifteen Christchurch residents judged the seriousness of 25 crimes, identified either by labels or vignettes, using the method of magnitude estimation. Judgments of the labels and vignettes were highly correlated, and overall the results suggested a social consensus on the relative seriousness of the crimes. The median estimates were highly correlated with the average sentences imposed by New Zealand courts and moderately correlated with the maximum sentences prescribed by legislation and police clearance priorities.
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology – SAGE
Published: Dec 1, 1994
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.