This article was downloaded by: [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza]

On: 29 January 2015, At: 08:39

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wecj20

The Troy Davis Effect: Does Information

on Wrongful Convictions Affect Death
Penalty Opinions?
a

Stephanie Diaz & Ray Garza

a

Department of Psychology and Communications, Texas A&M

International University, Laredo, Texas, USA
Accepted author version posted online: 14 Nov 2014.Published
online: 27 Jan 2015.

Click for updates

To cite this article: Stephanie Diaz & Ray Garza (2014): The Troy Davis Effect: Does Information on
Wrongful Convictions Affect Death Penalty Opinions?, Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, DOI:
10.1080/15377938.2014.936643
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15377938.2014.936643

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions

Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, 00:120, 2015

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1537-7938 print / 1537-7946 online
DOI: 10.1080/15377938.2014.936643

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

The Troy Davis Effect: Does Information

on Wrongful Convictions Affect Death
Penalty Opinions?
STEPHANIE DIAZ and RAY GARZA
Department of Psychology and Communications, Texas A&M International University,
Laredo, Texas, USA

Following the Supreme Courts use of social science research in

Furman v. Georgia, numerous studies have examined the factors
affecting support for the death penalty. Although it is known that the
death penalty continues to have strong support in the United States,
it remains unclear how the rise in media coverage of wrongful
convictions and the increasing number of Hispanics in the United
States will affect opinions of and support for the death penalty.
Using a sample of students at a predominantly Hispanic university,
this study explores the effect of exposure to information on wrongful
convictions on opinions about the death penalty.
KEYTERMS
Davis

Wrongful convictions, death penalty, opinions, Troy

Since the late 1980s, new advances in the study of DNA have led to
more than 300 postconviction exonerations. There have also been hundreds
of exonerations based on non-DNA evidence (Gross et al., 2005; Innocence
Project, n.d.). The notion of wrongful convictions has successfully penetrated
the public consciousness through television news stories, documentaries, and
newspaper and magazine articles that have brought to light convictions of
innocent individuals. The topic of wrongful convictions has also garnered the
attention of lawyers, activists, policymakers, and academics. As Baumgartner,
De Boef, and Boydstun (2008) illustrated, discussion of the death penalty
has been reframed to generate public doubt over death sentences. With
Submitted August 2013; resubmitted January 2014; accepted January 2014.
Address correspondence to Ray Garza, Department of Psychology and Communications,
Texas A&M International University, 5201 University Boulevard, Laredo, TX 78045. E-mail:
ray.garza@tamiu.edu
1

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

S. Diaz and R. Garza

the advent of 24-hr news channels, there is now more media coverage of
exonerations and more humanization of defendants on trial for capital crimes.
Therefore, researchers must study how knowledge of wrongful convictions
affects death penalty attitudes. The work of lawyers, journalists, and so on
has illustrated the factors that lead to wrongful convictions. However, this
does not reveal how wrongful convictions affect public perception of the
death penalty. This study explores the effect of exposure to information on
wrongful convictions on opinions about the death penalty.
It is important to study the opinion of Hispanics of the death penalty as
it is underreported compared to Anglo public opinion. More research is essential because Hispanics will make up 25% of the total American population
by 2050 and will soon constitute the majority demographic group in several
states (U.S. Census Bureau, Population Projection Division, 2012). Uhlaner
and Garcia (2002) found that Latinos tend to support the death penalty at
higher rates than Whites or African Americans. Yet Sanchez (2006) found
that Latinos born in the United States opposed the death penalty more than
foreign-born Latinos. Sanchez also found that men, Democrats, and Catholics
were more likely to oppose the death penalty (p. 439). Given the different
results reported, it is important to take a closer look at how Hispanics view
the death penalty.
More information on the publics perception of wrongful convictions
and how it affects attitudes toward the death penalty is essential for five
major reasons. First, legislators who are elected by their constituents will not
voice disapproval of the death penalty if their voters continue to support
the death penalty. Second, prosecutors may seek the death penalty in cases
in which they would not otherwise seek the death penalty if strong public
support is present in their area. Third, judges might be more inclined to impose the death sentence and appellate judges would be more motivated to
uphold death sentences if strong public support were present. Fourth, governors would be more hesitant to grant pardons or commute death sentences
to life imprisonment and be more inclined to favor death penalty legislation
if strong public support existed in their state. Fifth, the U.S. Supreme Court
will use public opinion as an indicator of evolving standards of decency
and will not see the death penalty as a violation of the Eighth Amendments
prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment (Cochran & Chamlin, 2005,
pp. 573574). For example, Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall stated
in Furman v. Georgia (1972) that the Court uses public opinion in weighing the constitutionality of capital punishment (p. 574). In fact, as Flanagan,
Gasdow, and Cohen (1992) suggested, Capital punishment may be a bellwether issue that reveals the ideological content of criminal control policy
in America (p. 38).
Evolving standards of decency have been an important issue in death
penalty jurisprudence since they were first cited in 1958 in Trop v. Dulles.
The Warren Court established that the Constitution is a living document and

The Troy Davis Effect

that therefore decisions evolve to mark the progress of a maturing society

(Trop v. Dulles, 1958). As Chief Justice William Rehnquist (1986) stated,

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

I think it would be very wrong to say that judges are not influenced
by public opinion. Indeed, I think it is all but impossible to conceive
of judges who are in any respect normal human beings who are not
influenced by public opinion (p. 752).

If the majority of citizens in the United States continue to support the death
penalty, lawmakers and Supreme Court justices will view the death penalty
as constitutional and consistent with the Eighth Amendment.
The development of the study of wrongful convictions stems from three
primary concerns that are stated in Ramsey and Frank (2007). The first concern is for individual justice (p. 437). It is the belief of many U.S. citizens
that law-abiding citizens should be free of oppression from the criminal
justice system and that the thought of wrongful convictions is unacceptable (p. 437). The second concern is for public safety. For every individual
wrongfully convicted of a crime, a guilty person can continue to commit
crimes. As Scheck, Neufeld, and Dwyer (2000) noted, All wrongfully convicted individuals take the lash of punishment for someone elses crime . . .
Far too often, they are surrogates for serial criminals and killers (p. 244).
Studies have estimated that the frequency of wrongful convictions ranges
from as little as 0.5% to as high as 20% (Huff, Rattner, and Sagarin, 1986; McCloskey, 1989; Proveda, 2001). Any percentage is high considering that the
Justice Department reported in 2011 that there are more than 1,500,000 individuals currently incarcerated (U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Statistics, 2012). The third concern is the decline in support for the criminal
justice system. Every news story of exoneration shakes the publics faith in
not only the criminal justice system but the professionals themselves that
people entrust to ensure justice is done in all crimes. It is to these concerns
that the study of the publics perception of wrongful convictions is directed.
The study of wrongful convictions started in 1932 by Edwin Borchard in
order to prove to a district attorney that wrongful convictions do occur after
the district attorney stated to him that innocent men are never convicted . . .
It is a physical impossibility (Borchard, 1932, p. 5). Borchard conducted a
qualitative study that looked at 65 cases in which an innocent person was
convicted of a crime. He published his findings in his book Convicting the
Innocent and was soon followed by a myriad of studies probing the same
question. It was not until the late 1980s that the focus of research regarding
wrongful convictions shifted to the question of what causes wrongful convictions to occur. Bedau and Radelets (1987) Miscarriages of Justice in Potentially Capital Cases increased academic interest in the extent and causes
of wrongful convictions (Ramsey & Frank, 2007, p. 439). Bedau and Radelet
(1987) identified 350 cases of wrongful convictions in potentially capital cases

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

S. Diaz and R. Garza

between 1900 and 1985. Of the 350 cases, 90% were identified by official
declarations of innocence. After Bedau and Radelets articles, journalists and
lawyers have explained quite extensively the causes of wrongful convictions.
Barry Scheck et al. (2000) cited many cases in which serious miscarriages
of justice occurred in their book Actual Innocence. Scheck et al. found eyewitness identification, jailhouse snitches, false confessions/admissions, government misconduct, improper forensic science, and bad lawyering all to be
causes of wrongful convictions (Innocence Project, n.d.). Radelet and Bedau
(1998) further stated that innocent persons are placed on death row because
of politically ambitious prosecutors, angry juries, and incompetent defense
counsel (p. 111). As Baumgartner et al. (2008) illustrated, with increased
media coverage of exonerations, the focus of argumentation regarding capital punishment has moved from a moral and constitutional issue to one
emphasizing the fairness of the systems and claims of innocent people on
death row (p. 9; see also Clawson, 2009, p. 1605).
In a similar vein, criminologists and social scientists opposed to the
death penalty have increasingly based their arguments on Justice Thurgood
Marshalls argument regarding capital punishment in his 1972 opinion in
Furman v. Georgia. Marshall argued that continued public support for capital punishment is largely due to a lack of knowledge or information about
it. According to Marshall, if the public were fully informed, the great mass
of citizens would conclude . . . that the death penalty is immoral and unconstitutional (Furman v. Georgia, 1972, at 363). Marshall identified one
exception to his hypothesis: Those who support the death penalty on retributive grounds will continue to support it regardless of newfound knowledge
(Furman v. Georgia, 1972, at 363).
A total of 23 studies have looked at one or all of Marshalls hypotheses
(Bohm, 1989, 1990; Bohm, Clark, & Aveni, 1990, 1991; Bohm & Vogel, 1991,
1994, 2002; Bohm, Vogel, & Maisto, 1993; Clarke, Lambert, & Whitt, 2001;
Cochran & Chamlin, 2005; Cochran, Sanders, & Chamlin, 2006; Ellsworth
& Ross, 1983; Lambert & Clarke, 2001; Longmire, 1996; Lord, Ross, & Lepper, 1979; Michel & Cochran, 2011; Patenaude, 2001; Sandys, 1995; Sarat &
Vidmar, 1976; Vidmar & Dittenhoffer, 1981; Weinstock & Schwartz, 1998;
Wright, Bohm, & Jamieson, 1995; Zeisel & Gallup, 1989). Most of these studies used the same methodology: a pretest and posttest survey to determine
knowledge of and support for the death penalty before and after exposure
to information regarding capital punishment in a college course on the death
penalty. These courses covered many topics related to capital punishment,
from the history of the death penalty to arbitrariness and discrimination in
the administration of the death penalty (Bohm and Vogel, 1991, p. 73), with
one class dedicated to studying the execution of innocent human beings
(Bohm and Vogel, 1991, p. 73). These studies, in the words of Bohm and
Vogel (1991), sought to isolate the specific stimuli that produce changes
in death penalty opinions when such changes occur (p. 70). However, the

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

The Troy Davis Effect

amount and kind of data about wrongful convictions were at the instructors
discretion and quite variable. Moreover, the data provided were often quite
preliminary.
In these studies, the question about support for the death penalty was
usually asked in an abstract way. For example, Bohm et al. (1993) asked,
Which of the following statements best describes your position toward the
death penalty for [some] people convicted of first-degree murder? (p. 32)
and Which of the following statements best describes your position toward
[all] people convicted of first-degree murder? (p. 32). Bohm et al. (1993)
did, however, include questions to tap aspects of personal involvement
by asking If you served on a jury in a trial where the defendant, if found
guilty, would automatically be sentenced to death, could you convict the
defendant? and If asked to do it, could you pull the level that would result
in the death of an individual convicted of first-degree murder? (p. 32). Both
questions tap aspects of personal involvement to a certain extent, but when
no background is provided regarding the defendant or the crime committed
the participants cannot adequately tap aspects of personal involvement
(p. 32). Cochran and Chamlin (2005) also used an abstract questionWhich
of the following statements best describes your position toward the death
penalty for all persons convicted of first-degree murder? (pp. 576577)to
determine their participants level of support for the death penalty.
Vollum, Longmire, and Buffington-Vollum (2004) believed that the relationship between death penalty support and the public confidence in its
application and administration is too complex to determine with one or
two questions (p. 526). Bowers, Vandiver, and Dugan (1994) agreed, stating
that when people are confronted with the particulars of crimes and defendants, with responsibility for its application, and with information about the
realities of capital punishment (p. 144), support for the death penalty will
weaken. The present study fills this gap in the literature by gauging the level
of support for the death penalty in both an abstract and a concrete way
by asking Which of the following best characterizes your opinion on the
death penalty for those convicted of violent crimes? and presenting case
vignettes of crimes eligible for the death penalty to see whether participants
could support the death penalty in each case. Furthermore, as Baumgartner
et al. (2008) illustrated, the average number of exonerations per year has increased over time (p. 1605). This rise in exonerations presents another reason
for revisiting the issue. Thus, this study attempts to determine whether information about wrongful convictions will influence a participants support for
and opinion of the death penalty in five case vignettes. Level of knowledge
about capital punishment is also used to determine whether Marshalls hypothesis about the relationship between level of knowledge and support for
the death penalty is correct. Information about wrongful convictions comes
from an interview with Barry Scheck, a video featuring Jennifer Thompson,
and a chapter from the book Actual Innocence (Scheck et al., 2000). This

S. Diaz and R. Garza

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

study hypothesizes that more knowledge about capital punishment will result in greater opposition to the death penalty and support Marshalls belief
that an informed population will be more likely to oppose the death penalty.
It also hypothesizes that knowledge gained from the excerpt from Actual Innocence will be particularly relevant in shaping attitudes toward the death
penalty in cases in which the presence or absence of DNA is a relevant issue.

METHOD
Research Design
A between-measures design was used in determining whether knowledge
of wrongful convictions affects attitudes toward the application of the death
penalty in each case. Two surveys were used in this design. The first surveys
independent variable was the level of support for the death penalty, which
was measured prior to the treatment. There was one independent variable
in the second part: the treatments. These had four conditions: a control
group with no treatment, a video interview with Barry Scheck, a YouTube
video featuring Jennifer Thompson, and an excerpt from Actual Innocence
(Scheck et al., 2000). Participants took part in one of the four conditions
of the experiment. The dependent variable of this study was the level of
support for the death penalty, which was included in the second survey.

Participants
The participants were all undergraduate students at a predominantly Hispanic
university in South Texas and were enrolled in a criminal justice, psychology,
or sociology course. There were a total of 481 respondents to the first survey.
Participants were asked to choose one of four dates to attend the second
session. The experimental group was a subsample of 135 participants out of
the 481 original respondents. Of the 135, males constituted 39.3% (n = 53)
and females 60.7% (n = 82). The median age was between 21 and 22. A total
of 90.4% of participants were of Hispanic ethnicity (n = 122), whereas 9.6%
(n = 13) of the participants were non-Hispanic Whites, African Americans, or
multiracial individuals. Before they received any of the treatment conditions,
a majority of this population supported the death penalty (n = 89, 65.9%),
and 45.2% (n = 61) of the population believed wrongful convictions occur
occasionally.

Survey Instrument
The information was obtained using two separate questionnaires. The
first survey collected basic demographic information. Also included in this
survey was a question measuring the participants level of support for the

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

The Troy Davis Effect

death penalty, which asked, Which of the following best characterizes your
opinion on the death penalty for those convicted of violent crimes? Response
categories ranged from strongly oppose (1) to strongly support (5) and included dont know (3) on a 5-point Likert-type scale to determine the
strength of the opinion. The last question asked how often the participant
believed wrongful convictions occur. In particular, it asked, How often do
you think people are wrongly convicted of death penalty offenses in the
State of Texas? Response categories ranged from never (1) to a great deal
of the time (5) and included dont know (3) on a 5-point Likert-type scale
to determine the respondents level of certainty on the matter. Included
with the first survey was a series of 10 statements representing truths and
myths regarding capital punishment to gauge the participants knowledge
about the death penalty. Participants were asked to indicate whether each
statement was true or false or to answer dont know. Seven of the 10
statements were drawn from Cochran and Chamlin (2005) and one was
drawn from Cochran et al. (2006; see Appendix A).
The second survey was given to participants after they watched or read
one of the conditions of the treatment. The survey consisted of five case
vignettes. Respondents were asked to assume that they were on a jury and
had before them the following convicted offenders whose sentences they
had to determine. For each case, respondents were asked to (a) indicate
whether they would vote for the death penalty in that case and (b) give a
brief rationale for their choice (see Appendix B). The second survey also
included a crime matrix, which asked participants to indicate their level of
support for the death penalty for eight crimes.

Procedure
Participants were assured that their participation would be anonymous. Provided with the survey were four dates and times for the second part of
the study. Participants checked which date best suited them for their participation. Prior to the second dates, the treatments were written on small
pieces of paper, closed, placed in a bowl, and then picked to ensure random
assignment.
The treatments used were as follows:

1. No treatment used for control purposes.

2. A 20-min 2009 YouTube video interview with Barry Scheck conducted
by Penn State University. In the interview, Scheck speaks about the case
of Marion Coakley and how this case led to the creation of the Innocence Project. Scheck further discusses the factors that lead to wrongful
convictions.

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

S. Diaz and R. Garza

3. A 20-min YouTube video featuring Jennifer Thompson. This video provided participants with a real-life example of how eyewitness testimony,
in this case from the victim herself, can result in the wrongful incarceration
of an innocent man. Thompson was a perfect eyewitness insofar as her
rapist did not conceal his face or inhibit her from viewing his face and
spoke to her during the sexual assault. Thompson further describes how
she chose Ronald Cotton as her rapist out of a lineup and was adamant
for 12 years that he was her rapist. Ronald Cotton was later exonerated
after he demanded that the DNA collected from the rape kit be tested.
This video was chosen because it emphasized the need for greater DNA
evidence to ensure eyewitness testimony is not the sole evidence against
a defendant.
4. The last chapter from the book Actual Innocence (Scheck et al., 2000).
The chapters title is Reckonings: An Update, and it discusses several
cases in which DNA testing led to an innocent mans exoneration. Our
reason for using a book excerpt was that a book is usually associated
with factual information based on research. Actual Innocence provided
participants with several examples of true cases of wrongful convictions.
The chapter demonstrates the need for greater reliance on DNA testing by
ending with the following statement: In the end, D.N.A. does not hold
all the answers: it only shows us the right questions. The time has come
to ask them (Scheck et al., 2000, p. 349).
After participants were exposed to the treatments, they were given the second survey and asked to assume that they were on a jury and had before
them the following convicted offenders whose sentences they had to determine. For each case, respondents were asked to (a) indicate whether they
would vote for the death penalty in the case and (b) give a brief rationale
for their choice. Participants were then asked to check off their respective
levels of support for capital punishment with regard to eight crimes.

RESULTS
Members of the initial sample of participants surveyed (N = 481) expressed
the belief that people in Texas are occasionally wrongly convicted of crimes
involving the death penalty (M = 2.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.94,
2.40]). In addition to being asked how often they believed that people who
are given the death penalty are wrongfully convicted, participants were asked
whether they supported the death penalty. There was a moderate level of
support for the death penalty in the population surveyed (M = 2.07, 95% CI
[1.98, 2.15]). We also examined whether there was a relationship between
how often people believed individuals are wrongfully convicted and their
support for the death penalty. There was a weak significant relationship

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

The Troy Davis Effect

between belief as to how often people are wrongly convicted and overall
support for the death penalty (r = .10, p < .01). The initial survey also
examined the overall knowledge that individuals had of the death penalty in
Texas. Ten true or false questions were used to assess whether individuals
really understood the prevalence of the death penalty and situations in which
individuals are given the death penalty in Texas. On average individuals
answered half of the questions correctly (M = 5.15, 95% CI [4.93, 5.34]).
The second part of the study was used to determine whether the type of
treatment received (i.e., no treatment, Scheck video of using DNA to reverse
wrongful convictions, Jennifer Thompsons video questioning the validity of
eyewitness testimony, and a selection from Actual Innocence) exerted any
kind of influence on the decision as to whether the death penalty would be
an appropriate punishment in each of the case studies. A KruskalWallis test
(see Table 1) revealed a significant effect between the different treatment
conditions only for the first case vignette that relied on DNA evidence ( 2 =
11.13, p < .01). There were no significant effects for the eyewitness case
study ( 2 = 5.87, p = .11), the confession case study ( 2 = 3.82, p = .28),
the jailhouse snitch case study ( 2 = 6.34, p = .10), or the legally blonde case
study ( 2 = 2.45, p = .48). A post hoc analysis showed that there were significant differences in the DNA case vignette between the Jennifer Thompson
video involving eyewitness testimony and the no treatment condition ( 2 =
5.31, p < .05), the Actual Innocence excerpt and the no treatment condition
( 2 = 7.12, p < .01), and the Barry Scheck DNA exoneration video and the
Jennifer Thompson video ( 2 = 3.92, p < .05). This indicates that individuals who were exposed to the Jennifer Thompson video or Actual Innocence
were more likely to choose the death penalty in the case vignette involving
DNA evidence.
In addition to being asked whether they would support the death
penalty in a series of cases after they had been exposed to the treatment,
participants were asked about their support for the death penalty in cases involving serious crimes such as rape and murder. Responses were rated from
0 (very strongly oppose) to 5 (very strongly support). The following results
are the averages and CIs for death penalty support in the following types of
cases: rape (M = 3.38, 95% 95% CI [3.06, 3.38]), murder (M = 3.95, 95% CI
[3.64, 4.27]), serial murder (M = 4.74, 95% CI [4.43, 5.06]), multiple murder
(M = 4.72, 95% CI [4.40, 5.04]), child murder (M = 4.76, 95% CI [3.96, 4.60]),
child rape (M = 4.27, 95% CI [3.94, 4.60]), law enforcement murder (M =
3.92, 95% CI [3.63, 4.22]), and heinous murder (M = 4.83, 95% CI [4.51, 5.14]).
A one-way analysis of variance was used to determine the effect of treatment condition on whether individuals would support the death penalty in
these types of cases (see Table 2). There was a significant effect for murder and multiple murder among the treatment conditions: murder, F(3, 131)
= 1.58, p < .05; multiple murder, F(1, 131) = 3.04, p < .05. There were
no significant effects for rape, serial murder, child murder, child rape, law

10

< .01.

No
Yes

Scheck Video Using

DNA
21
13

No Treatment
18
13

Barry Scheck YouTube

Interview
9
19

Jennifer Thompson Eyewitness

Testimony Video

TABLE 1 Cross-Tabulation of Scheck Video Using DNA and Choosing the Death Penalty

13
29

Book Excerpt
(Actual Innocence)

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

"
.28

2
11.13

11

The Troy Davis Effect

TABLE 2 Likelihood of Voting for the Death Penalty for Experimental Groups

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

Serious Crime
Rape
Murder
Serial murder
Multiple murder
Child murder
Child rape
Law enforcement
murder
Heinous murder
p

< .05,

Barry Scheck Jennifer Thompson Book Excerpt

YouTube Eyewitness Testimony
(Actual
No Treatment Interview
Video
Innocence)

3.03
3.76
4.65
4.35
4.41
3.82
3.65

3.20
3.29
4.13
4.10
4.23
3.83
3.42

3.86
4.39
4.93
5.07
5.07
4.61
4.32

3.67
4.36
5.12
5.22
5.21
4.74
4.19

1.58
3.41
1.95
3.04
2.57
2.30
2.05

4.62

4.39

5.00

5.26

1.67

< .01.

enforcement murder, or heinous murder: rape, F(1, 131) = 1.58, p = .19;

serial murder, F(1, 131) = 1.95, p = .12; child murder, F(1, 131) = 2.56, p =
.06; child rape, F(1, 131) = 2.29, p = .08; law enforcement murder, F(1, 131)
= 2.05, p = .11; and heinous murder, F(1, 131) = 1.67, p = .18. A post hoc
Tukey test showed that with regard to murder, the Jennifer Thompson video
differed significantly from the Scheck DNA exoneration video (p < .05). This
indicates that individuals who were exposed to the Jennifer Thompson video
were more likely to choose the death penalty in the case of murder. In addition, the Actual Innocence excerpt differed significantly from the Scheck
DNA exoneration video (p < .05), indicating a more favorable attitude toward
the death penalty in murder cases among those who read the Actual Innocence excerpt. For the case of multiple murders, the book excerpt differed
significantly from the Scheck DNA exoneration video (p < .05), indicating a
more favorable attitude toward the death penalty for this crime.
A major topic of interest in this study was whether individuals who
had previous knowledge of the death penalty would be less supportive of
it. As previously stated, there was a weak negative relationship between
knowledge and support (r = .10, p < .05). Individuals who had more
knowledge were generally more likely to oppose the death penalty. A linear
regression analysis indicated that the more quiz questions individuals answered correctly, the less likely they were to support the death penalty (see
Table 3). However, when we considered the different crimes committed,
TABLE 3 Summary of Simple Regression Analysis Between Knowledge About the Death
Penalty and Overall Support
Variable
Knowledge (quiz answers)
p

< .05.

SE B

.040

.019

.096

12

S. Diaz and R. Garza

TABLE 4 Pearsons Correlations for Knowledge About the Death Penalty and Support for
Serious Crimes

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

Serious Crime

Knowledge (Quiz Answers)

Rape
Murder
Serial murder
Multiple murder
Child murder
Child rape
Law enforcement murder
Heinous murder
p

< .05,

.13
.23
.22
.20
.21
.10
.19
.13

< .01.

weak to moderate negative correlations were found between the amount of

knowledge people had of the death penalty and choosing the death penalty
(see Table 4). This suggested that the more knowledge people had, the
less likely they were to choose the death penalty. In particular, there were
significant negative correlations between knowledge and murder (p < .01),
serial murder (p < .05), multiple murder (p < .05), child murder (p < .05),
law enforcement murder (p < .05), and heinous murder (p < .05). In order
to predict the outcome variable of choosing the death penalty in relation to
the knowledge that individuals had on capital punishment, we conducted
a regression to determine the outcome likelihood of predicting the use
of the death penalty by how many quiz questions individuals answered
correctly. Individuals were more likely to not choose the death penalty if
they answered a majority of the quiz questions correctly, with the exception
of the crimes of rape, child rape, and heinous crime (see Table 5). Lastly, it is
important to note that individuals who showed strong support for the death
penalty, regardless of prior knowledge of the death penalty or treatment
effect, supported capital punishment in all of the crimes in the crime matrix
(see Table 6).
TABLE 5 Summary of Simple Regression Analysis Between Knowledge About the Death
Penalty and Voting for the Death Penalty
Serious Crime
Rape
Murder
Serial murder
Multiple murder
Child murder
Child rape
Law enforcement murder
Heinous murder
p

< .05,

< .01.

SE B

.108
.180
.175
.162
.180
.091
.135
.104

.071
.067
.068
.070
.069
.074
.065
.069

.131
.227
.218
.197
.219
.106
.178
.141

13

The Troy Davis Effect

TABLE 6 Summary of Simple Regression Analysis Between Overall Opinion and Voting for
the Death Penalty for Serious Crimes

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

Serious Crime
Rape
Murder
Serial murder
Multiple murder
Child murder
Child rape
Law enforcement murder
Heinous murder

SE B

.49
.59
.50
.50
.51
.41
.47
.37

.25
.14
.14
.15
.15
.16
.17
.15

.27
.35
.29
.29
.29
.22
.29
.21

p < .01.

DISCUSSION
Our first hypothesis in this study was that individuals with more knowledge about the death penalty would show less support for using capital
punishment in a series of cases. Consistent with this expectation, the results
indicated a weak correlation between knowledge and level of support for
using the death penalty. In addition, we also found that more knowledgeable individuals were less likely to support the death penalty across a range
of different crimes (see Table 4). These results support Thurgood Marshalls
claim that the more knowledge an individual has about capital punishment,
the less likely he or she will be to support the death penalty (Bohm, 1989;
Bohm et al., 1991; Sarat & Vidmar, 1976).
The second part of the study looked into which treatment(s) (Jennifer
Thompson video, Scheck DNA exoneration video, and Actual Innocence
[Scheck et al., 2000] excerpt) would affect support for the death penalty in
a series of case vignettes. We found that individuals exposed to the Actual
Innocence excerpt were more likely to choose the death penalty in case
vignettes that utilized DNA testing. The response of yes in the DNA case
aligns with the theme of the book, as it argues that reliable DNA evidence
must be used in death penalty cases to ensure that the true perpetrator is
caught. Therefore, we conclude that our second hypothesis in this study was
validated. However, the second most effective treatment condition was the
Jennifer Thompson video, which discussed eyewitness testimony. Individuals
were also more likely to support the death penalty when exposed to the
Actual Innocence excerpt in the crime matrix. It is interesting that these
results were only significant for the crimes of murder and multiple murders.
Because the death penalty today is only applied in these types of cases,
the results are relevant to the actual use of the death penalty. Once again,
the second most effective treatment condition was the Jennifer Thompson
video in regard to attitudes toward the death penalty in cases of murder and
multiple murders.

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

14

S. Diaz and R. Garza

In examining the knowledge and method of delivery variables in this

study, we found that levels of support for the death penalty prior to treatment
had a significant effect on choosing the death penalty in the crime matrix.
Individuals who showed strong support for the death penalty were more
likely to favor it in answering the crime matrix (see Table 4). Thus, overall
support may be a confounding variable when one is assessing the effects
of different levels of treatment and knowledge. Future studies may want
to separate overall support and look at whether knowledge in itself is a
predictor of choosing the death penalty in a crime matrix.
There are several limitations present in the current study. First, the small
number of individuals who showed up for the second round of the study
was not expected. Initially there were 481 participants, a number that was
ultimately reduced to 135. We would have liked to have obtained a higher
number to ensure a more accurate and reliable analysis of the data. Second,
participants were not randomly assigned to treatment conditions. Individuals
were able to choose which date they would like to return for the second
part of the study. For future studies, the use of random assignment would
be preferable to ensure greater internal validity and reliability.
Another limitation had to do with our sample demographics. This
study focused mainly on Hispanic individuals, but that had more to do
with convenience because a majority of the population of our sample
was Hispanic. Future studies could purposely select only Hispanics to see
whether death penalty opinions are considerably unique among people of
different ethnicities.
One of our main implications for this study was based on the method
of delivery for information regarding the death penalty. There were three
specific methods of deliveries, and two were significantly important in influencing public opinion on choosing the death penalty for a specific crime
vignette and crimes. It is evident in this study that people exposed to written
material, such as the Actual Innocence excerpt, and Jennifer Thompsons
video were more inclined to choose the death penalty as a method of capital punishment. This may suggest that individuals need to be as certain as
possible to make a clear decision on using the death penalty due to the
fact that individuals have been exonerated by the use of DNA testing and by
wrongful eyewitness identification. If individuals felt that those specifications
were met in the case vignettes, then their decision favored the death penalty.
However, it is important to note that in regard to using the death penalty in a
case vignette and crime matrix, individuals who were exposed to the Actual
Innocence excerpt were more likely to favor the death penalty. This suggests
that written material may be more powerful than videos at influencing public
opinion. In reading Actual Innocence, individuals were probably more likely
to perceive the book as factual information backed by research. In contrast,
those who watched the Barry Scheck video on Marion Coakleys case, which
led to the creation of the Innocence Project, may have had the impression of

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

The Troy Davis Effect

15

it being a single case of wrongful conviction. Although Jennifer Thompsons

video was also one example, it was more personal and may have impacted
viewers more than the Barry Scheck video. This could be further analyzed
in future studies wanting to examine the influence on public opinion of the
death penalty of written information versus other methods of delivery.
Another limitation of this study involves the location where the study
was conducted. South Texas is a predominantly Hispanic area of the state,
so results may not be generalizable to other parts of the state and country.
However, it is important to note that Texas has the highest use of the death
penalty, which might imply that perceptions of the use of capital punishment
might be influenced by that fact. The results from this study suggest that
favorable impressions of the death penalty might be predicted by the overall
usage of capital punishment in the State of Texas. Therefore, utilizing other
Hispanic populations in Texas that are not the majority ethnicity could further
clarify whether there are differences of opinions regarding the death penalty.
In addition, focusing on other states that do not implement the death penalty
could also be a direction that researchers may want to consider in examining
this issue.
The use of a predominantly Hispanic sample enrolled in a university
provides much insight into how knowledge of wrongful convictions affects
participants rationale by tapping into their personal involvement by reporting true cases of wrongful convictions. Further research must be conducted
when the first posthumously exonerated person is determined to be unquestionably innocent. It is essential to continue research on this growing
population, for Hispanics will make up 25% of the total American population
by 2050 and will soon constitute the majority demographic group in several
states (U.S. Census Bureau, Population Projection Division, 2012). Furthermore, it would be interesting to replicate this study in a population located
in a state where the death penalty is not used as much as in Texas.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors of this study would like to thank Dr. John Kilburn, Dr. Kelly L.
Frailing, and Dr. Amy L. Poland for their helpful remarks and comments.

REFERENCES
Baumgartner, F. R., De Boef, S. L., & Boydstun, A. E. (2008). The decline of the death
penalty and the discovery of innocence. New York, NY: Cambridge University
Press.
Bedau, H. A., & Radelet, M. L. (1987). Miscarriages of justice in potentially capital
cases. Stanford Law Review, 40, 21179.

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

16

S. Diaz and R. Garza

Bohm, R. M. (1989). The effects of classroom instruction and discussion on death

penalty opinions: A teaching note. Journal of Criminal Justice, 17, 123131.
Bohm, R. M. (1990). Death penalty opinions: Effects of a classroom experience and
public commitment. Sociological Inquiry, 60, 285297.
Bohm, R. M., Clark, L., & Aveni, A. F. (1990). The influence of knowledge for death
penalty opinions: An experimental test. Justice Quarterly, 7, 175188.
Bohm, R. M., Clark, L., & Aveni, A. F. (1991). Knowledge and death penalty opinion:
A test of the Marshall hypotheses. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 28, 360387.
Bohm, R. M., & Vogel, R. E. (1991). Educational experiences and death penalty
opinions: Stimuli that produce changes. Journal of Criminal Justice Education,
2, 6980.
Bohm, R. M., & Vogel, R. E. (1994). A comparison of factors associated with uninformed and informed death penalty opinions. Journal of Criminal Justice, 22,
125143.
Bohm, R. M., & Vogel, R. E. (2002, March). More than ten years after: The long-term
stability of informed death penalty opinion. Paper presented at the 39th Annual
Meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Anaheim, CA.
Bohm, R. M., Vogel, R. E., & Maisto, A. A. (1993). Knowledge and death penalty
opinion: A panel study. Journal of Criminal Justice, 21, 2945.
Borchard, E. M. (1932). Convicting the innocent: Sixty-five actual errors of criminal
justice. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Bowers, W. J., Vandiver, M., & Dugan, P. H. (1994). A new look at public opinion
on capital punishment: What citizens and legislators prefer. American Journal
of Criminal Law, 22, 77150.
Clarke, A. W., Lambert, E., & Whitt, L. A. (20002001). Executing the innocent:
The next step in the Marshall hypotheses. Review of Law & Social Change, 26,
309345.
Clawson, R. A. (2009). The decline of the death penalty and the discovery of innocence [Book review]. Journal of Politics, 71, 16041606.
Cochran, J. K., & Chamlin, M. B. (2005). Can information change public opinion?
Another test of the Marshall hypothesis. Journal of Criminal Justice, 33, 573584.
Cochran, J. K., Sanders, B., & Chamlin, M. B. (2006). Profiles in change: An alternative
look at the Marshall hypotheses. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 17(2),
205226.
Ellsworth, P., & Ross, L. (1983). Public opinion and capital punishment: A close
examination of the views of abolitionists and retentionists. Crime and Delinquency, 29, 116169.
Flanagan, T. J., Gasdow, P., & Cohen, D. (1992). Conservatism and capital punishment in the state capital: Lawmakers and the death penalty. The Prison Journal,
72, 3756.
Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972)
Gross, S. R., Jacoby, K., Matheson, D.J., Montgomery, N., & Patil, S. (2005). Exonerations in the United States 1989 through 2003. Journal of Criminal Law and
Criminology, 95(2), 523560.
Huff, C. R., Rattner A., & Sagarin, E. (1986). Guilty until proven innocent: Wrongful
conviction and public policy. Crime and Delinquency, 32, 518544.

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

The Troy Davis Effect

17

Lambert, E., & Clarke, A. (2001). The impact of information on an individuals support
of the death penalty: A test of the Marshall hypothesis among college students
at a Michigan university. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 12(3), 215234.
Longmire, D. R. (1996). Americans attitudes about the ultimate weapon: Capital
punishment. In T. J. Flanagan & D. R. Longmire (Eds.), Americans view crime
and justice: A national public opinion survey (pp. 93108). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 20982109.
McCloskey, J. (1989). Convicting the innocent. Criminal Justice Ethics, 8, 212.
Michel, C., & Cochran, J. K. (2011). The effects of information on change in death
penalty support: Race-and gender-specific extensions of the Marshall hypotheses. Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, 9, 291313.
Patenaude, A. L. (2001). May God have mercy on your soul! Exploring and teaching a
course on the death penalty. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 12, 405425.
Proveda, T. G. (2001). Estimating wrongful convictions. Justice Quarterly, 18,
689708.
Radelet, M. L., & Bedau, H. A. (1998) The Execution of the Innocent. Law and
Contemporary Problems, 61, 105124.
Ramsey, R. J., & Frank, J. (2007). Perceptions of Criminal Justice Professionals Regarding the Frequency of Wrongful Conviction and the Extent of System Error.
Crime and Delinquency, 53(2), 436470.
Rehnquist, W. H. (1986). Constitutional law and public opinion. Suffolk University
Law Review, 20, 751769.
Sanchez, G. R. (2006). The role of group consciousness in Latino public opinion.
Political Research Quarterly, 59, 435446.
Sandys, M. (1995). Attitudinal change among students in a capital punishment class:
It may be possible. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 20, 3755.
Sarat, A., & Vidmar, N. (1976). Public opinion, the death penalty, and the Eighth
Amendment: Testing the Marshall hypothesis. Wisconsin Law Review, 17,
171206.
Scheck, B., Neufeld, P., & Dwyer, J. (2000). Actual innocence: When justice goes
wrong and how to make it right. New York, NY: Penguin Group.
The Innocence Project. (n.d). Non-DNA exonerations. Retrieved March 12, 2013 from
http://www.innocenceproject.org/.
Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (1958).
Uhlaner, C. J., & Garcia, C. F. (2002). Latino Public Opinion. In B. Norrander & C.
Wilcox (Eds.), Understanding Public Opinion (pp. 77102). Washington, DC:
CQ Press.
U.S. Census Bureau (2012). Population Projection Division: U.S. Census Bureau
projections show a slower growing, older, more diverse nation a half century
from now. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/population/projections/data/
national/2012.html.
U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2012). Prisoners in 2011
(Report No. NCJ 239808). Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/
pdf/p11.pdf

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

18

S. Diaz and R. Garza

Vidmar, N., & Dittenhoffer, T. (1981). Informed public opinion and death penalty
attitudes. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 23, 4356.
Vollum, S., Longmire, D. R., & Buffington-Vollum, J. (2004). Confidence in the death
penalty and support for its use: Exploring the value-expressive dimension of
death penalty attitudes. Justice Quarterly, 21, 521545.
Weinstock, D., & Schwartz, G. (1998). Executing the innocent: Preventing the ultimate injustice. Criminal Law Bulletin, 34, 328347.
Wright, H., Bohm, R., & Jamieson, K. (1995). A comparison of uniformed and informed death penalty opinions: A replication and expansion. American Journal
of Criminal Justice, 20, 5787.
Zeisel, H., & Gallup, A. M. 1989. Death penalty sentiment in the United States.
Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 5, 28596.

CONTRIBUTORS
Stephanie Diaz is a graduate student at the University of Cincinnati. Her
primary interests are on public opinion on the death penalty and the use of
social media technology in courtroom reporting. This work reflects part of
an honor thesis completed by Stephanie Diaz at Texas A&M International
University.
Ray Garza is an Instructor of Psychology at Texas A&M International University. He has been a full-time instructor since January 2011. He primarily
teaches courses in Psychology in addition to Statistics in Psychology and
Criminal Justice. His primary interests are in Evolutionary Psychology, but
has worked in Criminal Justice research in public opinion on the death
penalty and social media technology in courtroom reporting.

APPENDIX A
Knowledge Statements
Note: All response categories were the same: true, false, and dont know.
Answers were coded 0 for wrong and 1 for right.
1. [Know1] Similar offenders convicted of murder often receive dissimilar
sentences; that is, some are sentenced to death while others are sentenced to an alternative less than death. Correct Answer: True
2. [Know2] Capital punishment reduces violent crime. Correct Answer: False
3. [Know3] Poor people who commit murder are more likely to be sentenced to death than rich people. Correct Answer: True

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

The Troy Davis Effect

19

4. [Know4] Capital punishment is less expensive than life imprisonment

without parole. Correct Answer: False
5. [Know5] A Black person is more likely to receive the death penalty than
a White person for the same crime. Correct Answer: True
6. [Know6] Those who murder White victims are more likely to receive the
death penalty than those who murder Blacks. Correct Answer: True
7. [Know7] The murder rate is lower in states with the death penalty. Correct
Answer: False
8. [Know8] The death penalty is more effective than life imprisonment without possibility of parole in protecting society from murder and other
violent crimes. Correct Answer: False
9. [Know9] A juvenile offender in the State of Texas may be sentenced to
death for especially violent crimes. Correct Answer: False
10. [Know10] The murder rate usually drops in the weeks following a wellpublicized execution. Correct Answer: False

APPENDIX B
Case Vignettes
Note: All response categories were the same: yes and no and a blank space
for the participants rationale. Answers were coded 0 for no and 1 for yes.

1. DNA: A White male in his late 20s was caught in the scene of a heinous
murder with his DNA on the victim and on the murder weapon.
2. Eyewitness Identification: A White female was raped and shot to death
during a party. Several partygoers witnessed the perpetrator fleeing the
scene. Eyewitnesses on the scene described a Black male in early 20s
wearing a local high school letterman jacket. A Black male in his early
20s was apprehended 15 miles away from the crime scene wearing said
jacket. Eyewitnesses from the scene picked him in a lineup. Suspect says
he was at his home with parents during the alleged murder/rape and both
parents verify his whereabouts. No DNA was found on the victim and no
murder weapon was retrieved.
3. False Confession: A female was raped, tortured, and murdered in her
apartment. Detectives asked residents in the apartment for any information
about the victim. Detectives stated in their notes that a mentally impaired
male was acting suspiciously and took him in for questioning. After 8 hours
of questioning, the male submitted a signed confession. During trial, the
male revealed the detectives used physical and mental coercion to get him
to confess. They repeatedly offered him information about the crime and

Downloaded by [Texas A & M International University], [Ray Garza] at 08:39 29 January 2015

20

S. Diaz and R. Garza

told him what to write on the confession. DNA evidence on victim did not
match suspect.
4. Jailhouse Snitch: A male suspect, while waiting for a court appearance for
a murder and sexual assault of a child, sat in the local jail and engaged in a
conversation with another inmate. The inmate, who was there for battery
and theft charges, told prosecutors that the alleged suspect confessed
to him about the murder and provided him with details that only the
murderer would know. The prosecutors offered the inmate a reduced
sentence and no probation if he testified at the trial about the conversation.
5. Legally Blonde: A rich, influential man in the upper 70s was shot to death
in his own home. His 29-year-old daughter stated she saw her stepmother,
a 25-year-old, standing over his body covered with his blood. The stepmother and father married 2 months prior with no prenuptial agreement.
The stepmother stated she was exercising at the time of the murder and
came home to find the husband dead. No recording can be found of the
stepmother at the gym and no witnesses can verify her whereabouts. No
murder weapon was recovered and no fingerprints were found at the
scene.