Content uploaded by Phillip Tor Manyok
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Phillip Tor Manyok on Apr 27, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 1
Journal of Social and Political Science
Volume 1| Issue 5
Case Report Open Access
Capital Punishment
Phillip Tor Manyok, PhD
Research Associate at Valka-Mir Human Security LLC
*Corresponding author: Dr. Phillip Tor Manyok, Research Associate at Valka-Mir Human Security LLC, USA;
Email: pm3.kamago@yahoo.com
Citation: Dr. Phillip Tor Manyok (2018) Capital Punishment: Nessa Journal Social and Political Science.
Received: 28th March 2018 Accepted: 4th April 2018 Published: 21st April 2018
Copyright: © 2018 Dr. Phillip Tor Manyok. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided
the original author and source are credited.
Abstract
The politics of capital punishment in the United States are subtle. From a democratic view point, public opinion affects
the policy making process. In a majoritarian democracy like the United States, death penalty issue has been a concern
in a sense that if majority of people unilaterally support execution, the voice of the minority in the country becomes
silenced and as a consequence, death penalty appears as if it is being forced on society by those who their voices and
views dominated the public discourse. At the present, the death penalty support in the United States is not approached
through the ballot box. Rather, discourse about death penalty have been through federal and states courts. On
numerous occasions, the federal courts and states governments have sided with supporters of death penalty without
putting the issue to the voters. The courts frequently uphold rulings that enforced death penalty on general public
despites public opposition or objection to death penalty. In this report, death penalty will be examined in the context of
education level, political views and race. In this analytical report, death penalty is treated as a dependent variable
while education level, political views and race will be examined as independent variables to help explain the nature of
division among American public over the death penalty issue.
Keywords: Death penalty, variables, jury bleaching, racial biases and prejudices
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 2
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
Literature Review
Several researches have been done to explain why support for death penalty polarized the American people. Gonzalez
(2001) explored demographic variables of education, income, political party, liberal/conservative, race and their
relationship to attitudes toward death penalty. After examining these variables, he concluded that there is a co-
relationship between education level, income level, political party identification (liberal or conservative), race and the
generated biased attitude toward death penalty (Gonzalez, 2001). Of the 331 people he surveyed, 49 % of the high
school graduates strongly supported death penalty, 45 % of college graduates slightly supported death penalty and 17
% of those with professional degrees supported death penalty. From this finding, Gonzalez concluded that, “support
for death penalty decreases as level of education rise." In addition, Gonzalez, linked the income variable to education,
his hypothesis was, the higher the level of education one attains, the higher income one is likely to earn. After
examining income distribution of his sample, he found that 39 % of the people earning an annual income of $ 15,000
or less strongly support death penalty, 44 % of those earning $15,000 to $ 30,000 indicated strong support, 48 % of
those earning $30,000 to $ 45,000 slightly support, and 44 % of those earning $45,000 to $ 60,000 support death
penalty. From the income variable, Gonzalez concluded that, “the biased attitudes toward support for death penalty
decreases with increase in the level of income that individual earn.
In term of party identification and party ideology, Gonzalez study found 39 % of the people surveyed identified
themselves as Democrats, and 39 % considered themselves Independents while 59 % of those surveyed considered
themselves Republicans (Gonzalez, 2001). When they were asked about where they stand on death penalty, 39 %
percent of the Democrats and 39 % of Independents said they support death penalty while 59 percents of the
Republicans said they support death penalty. Gonzalez (2001) argued that the distinction on the level of attitudes of
those who considered themselves liberals and conservatives indicated that those who identified themselves liberals
expressed attitude similar to that of those who considered themselves as independents in regard to their level of
support for death penalty. While those who considered themselves, conservatives expressed strong attitude in support
of death penalty (Gonzalez, 2001).
Gonzalez research found that African Americans have strong opposition to death penalty due to their negative
perception that death rows inmates are proportionally African Americans. While this may not necessarily mean that
the system is racially discriminatory, it raises the role that race biased toward death penalty plays a part in the public
discourse particularly among African American communities where there are perceptions that blacks convicted of
murdering whites are likely to face death penalty whereas they are less likely to face death penalty if death involves a
minority. Hurwitz et al (2007) research argued that this subtle biased is affected by things like ‘jury bleaching’ which
is a prosecutorial process that many district attorneys use to dismiss African Americans from jury pools in capital
cases for reasons like their past felonies e.g. DUI and robberies. The perception about death penalty by far has become
a racially charge given the nature of racial disparity that exists between whites and blacks and by the scope in which
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 3
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
death rows inmates are disproportionately composed of blacks. Therefore, because it is very difficult for many people
in the United States to think of death penalty without thinking of its racial elements, it is necessary to analyze the
attitudes of whites and African Americans by examining why each racial group hold such attitudes or beliefs about
death penalty.
To help explain this racial attitudes and beliefs, Hurwitz et al (2007) conducted a survey on the issue of interracial
differences on death penalty by examining 600 whites and 600 black’s respondents. These respondents were randomly
selected and were asked the same question (do you support death penalty for those convicted of committing murder?).
Experiment condition one (baseline, no argument), experiment condition two (interracial condition) and experiment
condition three (innocent condition). African Americans respondents were strongly opposed to death penalty (34.17
% baseline condition, 43.60 % interracial condition, and 45.98 % innocent condition in all three experiment conditions
while whites’ respondents to the conditions (strongly oppose) were lower 17.95 % baseline condition, 11.38 %
interracial condition and 20.09 % under innocent condition.
Hurwitz et al., research found that interracial differences between blacks and whites was affected by prejudice factors
like anti-black stereotypes, fear of black crime, racial perception about the judicial system and desire for punitive
punishment of crime. Hurwitz et al (2007) concluded on the survey of the sample that most blacks are receptive of
arguments against death penalty that frame the issue in terms of fairness because of their belief that criminal justice
system in the United States is racially unfair. Whites on other hand were found to have an immune attitude that frames
the issue of death penalty in term of interracial unfairness (Hurwitz et al, 2007). In general, the research concluded
that whites have predisposition desire- like for punitive crime punishment, fear of black crimes, black stereotypes that
influence their strong support for death penalty while blacks are predisposed to perceptions like unfair judicial system
anchored in historical sentiments against whites and the institutions that have systemically put people of color at
judicial disadvantage.
Hurwitz et al (2007) finding is also supported by Gallup (2010) telephone survey of 1,025 randomly selected adults
age 18 and older living in the continental United States. This Gallup survey asked a generic question, are you in favor
of the death penalty for a person convicted of a murder? (Refer to table two below in the appendix section)
Based on this question, Gallup Survey found that race and party identification played role in people support level for
death penalty. Of the 1,025 adults that Gallup interviewed, 69 % of white respondents approved death penalty for a
person convicted of a murder crime while only 55 % of the nonwhites approved death penalty. In the case of
party/political identification, 78 % of those who considered themselves Republicans approved death penalty for a
person convicted of a murder crime while only 55 % of those who said are Democrats approved death penalty for
people convicted of murder crimes. Thus, from this survey, Gallup concluded that support for death penalty is strong
among men, whites, and Republicans than it is among women, nonwhites and Democrats segments of the U.S.
Population (Gallup Survey, 2010).
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 4
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
Hurwitz et al, (2007) findings about blacks’ beliefs that Justice System in the United States are also confirmed by
Ogletree (2002) research. Ogletree argued that most of the blacks’ sentiments is rooted in history of lynching of people
of color in which they correlate lynching practices of Jim Crow era and current imposition of capital punishment to
characterize unfairness of the white dominated judicial system. Ogletree research points to unfair practices like jury
bleaching which is a process use by district attorneys to remove or excuse people with past felonies like DUI, robbery
from a potential pool of jury.
Ogletree’s research found jury bleaching carries discriminatory connotation in a sense black people are likely to be
removed from serving on a jury due to pervasive nature of crimes distribution in the United States. This research
pointed to history of criminal prosecution in Dallas county, Texas in which prosecutor's office in a Batson's murder
case used a developed a jury selection process that carries discriminatory instructions like: Do not takes Jews,
Negroes, Dagos, Mexicans or member of minority race on a jury no matter how rich or well educated they are Or in
the case of Missouri v. Alexander where a prosecutor challenged the black juror because he was unemployed, did not
understand one of the questions asked during the voir dire and lived in a high crime neighborhood (Ogletree, 2002).
Whether these incidents are rare or unfortunately, they raised the racial aspect of the judicial system that many blacks
and minorities see as another whites’ dominated institution.
Hypotheses
Hypothesis one (H1), the level of support for death penalty decreases as level of education rises.
Hypothesis two (H2), Americans that hold conservative political views strongly support death penalty than those who
hold liberal political views.
Hypothesis three (H3), there is a substantial race gap in support for death penalty with whites supporting death penalty
more than African Americans.
Methodology
Samples
The sampling method utilizes in this report is based on 2008 General Social Survey. The 2008 GSS utilizes transitional
design in which there was a new panel drawn and interviews attempted for about 2,000 cases based on 2006 panel. Of
this 2,000 panel cases, there were 59 cases that were determined to be out of scope in which they have died or were not
residing in the United States households anymore. In survey, 1,536 were interviewed, 405 were found to be
nonrespondents. When survey decision was weighted to take the GSS sample design into consideration, 77.8% were
respondents, 19.8 % were no respondents, and about 2.4 % were of scope having died or no longer live in the United
States. Among the in scope, the weighted interviews, the responding rate was 79.7 %. In this 2008 general social
survey of 2,023 adults age 18 and over, respondents were asked questions about several variables pertaining to major
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 5
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
topic e.g. age, religious beliefs, race, education, political party identifications etc. The samples were weighted to
produce some findings deemed to be representatives of adults in the United States.
For this paper, the focus is going to be on three variables. The first is death penalty which is a dependent and measured
as a nominal variable. In this report, respondents are asked the following question. Do you support or oppose the death
penalty for persons convicted of murders? The expected response options expected for this dependent variable are: 1=
I support and 2 = I oppose
The first of the independent variables is education which is measured as a nominal variable. The respondents were
given this statement to complete [highest degree completed] and the expected response options are: 0 = never finish
high school, 1 = High school diploma, 2 = associate degree, 3 = bachelor degree and 4 = graduate degree. The second
independent variable is political views measured as an ordinal variable. The respondents were given this statement to
complete [ I am going to show a seven-point scale on which the political views that people might hold are arranged
from extremely liberal to extremely conservative. Where would you place yourself on this scale?] and the expected
response options are: 1 = extremely liberal, 2 = liberal, 3 = slightly liberal, 4 = moderate, 5 = slightly conservative,6 =
conservative and 7 = extremely conservative. The Last independent variable is race and was measured as nominal.
Respondents are asked this statement to complete [Race or ethnicity of respondent] and expected response options are:
1 = White, 2 = Black, 3 = American Indian or Alaska Native, 4 = Asian American or Pacific Islander, 5 = Hispanic
To test the relationships that exists between independent variables of education, political views, race and death
penalty, Chi Square was used as a statistical method of analysis. The essence of Chi Square was to test null hypothesis
to confirm or reject it. To confirm or reject null hypothesis depends on whether there is a significant difference
between the stated critical region which is area of sample distribution that includes unlikely sample outcomes and the
obtained outcome of the Chi Square statistical tests (Healey, 2009, pp.272-292).
Hypotheses Testing
Hypothesis One
Assumptions and meeting the test requirements steps
1. First assumption is, these are random independent samples and are measured at nominal level
2. Stated hypothesis
Null hypothesis (H0): The level of education doesn’t affect people attitudes toward death penalty support
Hypothesis one (H1), the level of support for death penalty decreases as level of education rises.
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 6
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
3. To establish critical region, I set Alpha to be 0.05 and used chi square table to obtain the critical region. Based
chi square, critical region starts at 3.841 with 1 degree of freedom.
4. To confirm or reject this hypothesis, I used SPPS version 18 software to do the Chi Square statistical testing
(Refer to table 3 a, b & c in the appendix). The outcome of the SPSS Student 18 software calculation
produced chi square value (Obtained) 27.191 and there was 4 degrees of freedom. The exact significance of
chi square reported in the column labeled “Asymp. Sig (2 sided),” is .000.
5. Interpreting the test result. Based on the chi square obtained score (27.191) and critical region (3.841), there’s
a significant difference that cannot just occur by random chance. Therefore, this test rejected the null
hypothesis [the level of education doesn’t affect people attitudes toward death penalty support] and confirmed
hypothesis one [the level of support toward death penalty decreases as level of education rises].
Hypothesis two (H2), Americans that hold conservative political views strongly support death penalty than those who
hold liberal political views.
Assumptions and meeting the test requirements steps
1. First assumption is, these are random independent samples and are measured at nominal level
2. Stated hypothesis
Null hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference between liberal Americans and conservative
Americans in the level of support on death penalty
Hypothesis one (H2), Americans that hold conservative political views strongly support death penalty than
those who hold liberal political views.
3. To establish critical region, I set Alpha to be 0.05 and used chi square table to obtain the critical region. Based
chi square, critical region starts at 3.841 with 1 degree of freedom.
4. To confirm or reject this hypothesis, I used SPPS version 18 software to do the Chi Square statistical testing
(Refer to table 4 a, b & c in the appendix). The outcome of the SPSS Student 18 software calculation
produced chi square value (Obtained) 83.777 with 6 degrees of freedom. The exact significance of chi square
reported in the column labeled “Asymp. Sig (2 sided),” is .000.
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 7
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
5. Interpreting the test result. Based on the chi square obtained score (83. 777) with 6 degrees of freedom, critical
region starts at 12.592. This is a big significant difference that cannot just occur by random chance. Therefore,
this test rejected the null hypothesis [There is no significant difference between liberal Americans and
conservative Americans in the level of support on death penalty] and confirmed hypothesis two [Americans
that hold conservative political views strongly support death penalty than those who hold liberal political
views.
Hypothesis three (H3), there is a substantial race gap in support for death penalty with whites supporting death penalty
more than African Americans.
Assumptions and meeting the test requirements steps
1. First assumption is, these are random independent samples and are measured at nominal level
2. Stated hypothesis
Null hypothesis (H0): There is no substantial race gap in support for death penalty between whites and blacks
Hypothesis one (H3), there is a substantial race gap in support for death penalty with whites supporting death
penalty more than African Americans
3. To establish critical region, I set Alpha to be 0.05 and used chi square table to obtain the critical region. Based
chi square, critical region starts at 3.841 with 1 degree of freedom.
4. To confirm or reject this hypothesis, I used SPPS version 18 software to do the Chi Square statistical testing
(Refer to table 3 a, b & c in the appendix). The outcome of the SPSS Student 18 software calculation
produced chi square value (Obtained) 70.850 with 4 degrees of freedom. The exact significance of chi square
reported in the column labeled “Asymp. Sig (2 sided),” is .000.
5. Interpret the result. Based on 4 degrees of freedom, the critical region starts at 9.448 which is quiet a
significant different to just happen by chance. Therefore, this test rejected null hypothesis [There is no
substantial race gap in support for death penalty between whites and blacks and confirmed Hypothesis one
(H3), [ there is a substantial race gap in support for death penalty with whites supporting death penalty more
than African Americans]
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 8
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
Table 1: Percentage Support for Death Penalty across Race and Experiment Conditions
Baseline condition
Interracial condition
Innocent condition
No Argument
Death penalty is unfairly because
most people who are executed are
African Americans]
[Death penalty is unfairly
because too many people
executed are innocent]
Do you favor or oppose death
penalty for those committed of
murder?
Do you favor or oppose death
penalty for those committed of
murder?
Do you favor or oppose
death penalty for those
committed of murder?
White
Strong oppose
Somewhat
oppose
Somewhat favor
Strongly favor
17.95%
17.09%
29.06%
35.90%
11.38%
17.79%
25.20%
51.63%
20.09%
45.63%
29.46%
34.82%
Blacks
Strong oppose
Somewhat oppose
Somewhat favor
Strongly favor
34.17%
15.83%
22.50%
27.50%
43.60%
18.48%
17.54%
20.38%
45.98%
20.09%
18.75%
15.18%
American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 51, No. 4, October 2007, Pp. 996–1012
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 9
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
Table 2: National Racial Opinion about Support for Death Penalty in the United States
Gallup Survey, October 2010
Table 3 (a) Education Case Processing Summary
Cases
Valid
Missing
Total
N
Percent
N
Percent
N
Percent
Favor Or Oppose
Death Penalty For
Murder * Rs
Highest Degree
1398
94.1%
87
5.9%
1485
100.0%
% approve
% Disapprove
% No opinion
National Adults
64
29
6
Men
71
24
6
Women
58
35
7
Whites
69
26
5
Nonwhites
55
37
8
Republicans
78
16
5
Democrats
55
42
3
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 10
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
Table 3 (b) Favor or Oppose Death Penalty for Murder* RS Highest Degree
RS Highest Degree
Total
Lt High School
High
School
Junior
College
Bachelor
Graduate
Favor Or
Oppose
Death
Penalty For
Murder
Favor
Count
130
498
81
150
69
928
% Within RS
Highest Degree
61.3%
71.9%
68.6%
62.2%
51.5%
66.4%
Oppose
Count
82
195
37
91
65
470
% within RS
Highest Degree
38.7%
28.1%
31.4%
37.8%
48.5%
33.6%
Total
Count
212
693
118
241
134
1398
% within RS
Highest Degree
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Table 3 (c) Chi-Square Tests
Value
Df
Asymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square
27.191a
4
.000
Likelihood Ratio
26.694
4
.000
Linear-by-Linear Association
9.615
1
.002
N of Valid Cases
1398
a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is
39.67.
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 11
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
Results
Descriptive statistics of Hypotheses Tests
Educational Level: The data analysis of variables found in the 2008 GSS data base supported both three hypotheses.
In the case of the first Hypothesis (H1) which stated that level of death penalty support decreases as the level of
education rises. Of the 1,398 valid cases interviewed, the total percentage number of people who favored death
penalty was 66.4 %. When this was examined in the context of people educational level, there was a clear trend that
supported hypothesis (H1) with an exception of those who don’t have high school degrees in which 63.4 % favor death
penalty. However, the level of support for death penalty decreased with each level of education as follows from high
school degree (71.9 %), junior college degrees (68.6 %), Bachelor Degrees (62.2 %), Graduate degrees (51.5 %). This
same trend was replicated among those who opposed death penalty for those who committed murders. The opposition
to death penalty was found to be higher among those with higher degrees and it declined as level of education
decreases as follows: Graduate degrees (48.5 %), Bachelor degrees (37.8 %), Junior college degrees (31.4 %), and
high school degree (28.1 %). (Refer to table 3 (a) for more details). As such, this data analysis supports the chi square
statistical test of hypothesis one (H1), and more importantly, the data analysis supported findings found in the
literature review section. Hence, it was sufficient to conclude that level of support toward death penalty decreases as
the level of education increases.
Political views: The data confirmed that there was a relationship between political views and the level of support for
death penalty. Of the 1, 349 valid cases interviewed, the percentage of those who favor death penalty in general was
found to be 66.3 %. Of these number, those who considered themselves slightly conservative, conservative, extremely
conservative accounted for 70.7 %, 81.8 % and 81.3 % respectively while those who considered themselves extremely
liberal, liberal, slightly liberal constituted 44.0 %, 44.9 % and 58.5 % respectively. This same trend was observed even
among those who opposed death penalty. The percentage of those who opposed death penalty was higher among those
who considered themselves liberal average 52.2 % while those who opposed death penalty among conservative
constituted an average of 22.1 %. Therefore, based on the analysis of this data, it was concluded that support for death
penalty is higher among those who hold conservative political views and lower among those who hold liberal political
views. Moreover, this data analysis also confirmed what the literature suggested regarding how the conservative
Americans tend to favor death penalty for those convicted of murder crimes (Gonzalez, 2001) (Refer to table 4 a, b &
c for more details).
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 12
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
Table 4 (a) Political View Case Processing Summary
Cases
Valid
Missing
Total
N
Percent
N
Percent
N
Percent
Favor Or Oppose Death
Penalty For Murder *
Think Of Self As Liberal
Or Conservative
1349
90.8%
136
9.2%
1485
100.0%
Table 4 (b) Favor or oppose death penalty* Think of self as liberal or conservative
Think Of Self As Liberal Or Conservative
Total
Extremely
Liberal
Liberal
Slightly
Liberal
Moderate
Slightly
Conservativ
e
Conservative
Extremely
Conservativ
e
Favor
Or
Oppose
Death
Penalty
For
Murder
Favor
Count
22
80
86
339
135
193
39
894
% Within Think
Of Self As
Liberal Or
Conservative
44.0%
44.9%
58.5%
67.9%
70.7%
81.8%
81.3%
66.3%
Oppose
Count
28
98
61
160
56
43
9
455
% Within Think
Of Self As
Liberal Or
Conservative
56.0%
55.1%
41.5%
32.1%
29.3%
18.2%
18.8%
33.7%
Total
Count
50
178
147
499
191
236
48
1349
% Within Think
Of Self As
Liberal Or
Conservative
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 13
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
Table 4 (c) Chi-Square Tests
Value
Df
Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square
83.777a
6
.000
Likelihood Ratio
83.975
6
.000
Linear-by-Linear Association
78.433
1
.000
N of Valid Cases
1349
a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 6.19.
Table 5(a) Death Penalty Case Process Summary
Cases
Valid
Missing
Total
N
Percent
N
Percent
N
Percent
Favor Or Oppose Death
Penalty For Murder * What Is
Rs Race 1st Mention
1388
93.5%
97
6.5%
1485
100.0%
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 14
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
Table 5 (b) Favor Or Oppose Death Penalty for Murder * What Is Rs Race 1st Mention
What Is Rs Race 1st Mention
Total
White
Black Or
African
American
American
Indian Or
Alaska
Native
Asian And
Pacific
Islander
American
Hispanic
Favor Or Oppose
Death Penalty For
Murder
Favor
Count
765
89
12
28
29
923
% Within What Is
Rs Race 1st
Mention
72.1%
44.9%
66.7%
60.9%
44.6%
66.5%
Oppose
Count
296
109
6
18
36
465
% Within What Is
Rs Race 1st
Mention
27.9%
55.1%
33.3%
39.1%
55.4%
33.5%
Total
Count
1061
198
18
46
65
1388
% Within What Is
Rs Race 1st
Mention
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 15
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
Table 5(c) Chi-Square Tests
Chi-Square Tests
Value
Df
Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square
70.850a
4
.000
Likelihood Ratio
67.670
4
.000
Linear-by-Linear Association
35.938
1
.000
N of Valid Cases
1388
Based on the mean scores and the standard deviation scores between those who considered themselves conservatives
and liberal, it was observed that they were similarities. The average means for conservatives in general was 1. 56 and
for liberal, it was 1.22 and their standard deviations were 0.498 and 0.498. The closeness in the mean scores showed
that the number of people who favor or oppose death penalty on each side was almost the same which supported
whites and blacks’ division on the issue of death penalty. This was also supported by closeness of the standard
deviation which was virtually tied at 0.498 for each race based on ANOVA table 7 (a). That being said, the ANOVA
data analysis raised some doubt about hypothesis two [Hypothesis two (H2), Americans that hold conservative
political views strongly support death penalty than those who hold liberal political views]. If means score and standard
deviations are equal, it suggests that blacks and whites are equally divided and that hypothesis two may need to be
revisited because of the doubt raised by data regarding mean scores and standard deviations of those who considered
themselves either conservatives or liberals.
Race: The data confirmed that there is a relationship between one’s racial identity and the level of support toward
death penalty. Of the 1,388 valid cases interviewed, it was found that 66.5 % of the total respondents favored death
penalty. When this is broken down into race, support for death penalty was 72.1 % among whites, 66.7 % among
American Indians, 60.9 % among Asian and Pacific Americans, 44.9 % among blacks and 44.6 % among Hispanic
Americans. As this percentages indicated, the results were consistent with the literature findings about whites having
tendency to favor death penalty for those convicted of murder crimes than the blacks.
Therefore, based on this data analysis, the hypothesis three [there is a substantial race gap in support for death penalty
with whites supporting death penalty more than African Americans] was accepted and the conclusion was, there is
indeed a substantial racial gap between whites and blacks in their level of support for the death penalty for those who
are convicted of murder crimes (refer to table 5 a, b & c for more details). Looking at the ANOVA analysis results
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 16
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
table 6 (a) & (b), standard deviations were almost similar (0 .449 for whites, 0.449 for blacks). The standard deviation
indicated that there was no diversity in the distribution of the samples and this led to this conclusion that, blacks and
whites are evenly divided on their level of support toward death penalty for those who convicted of murder crimes.
Moreover, the mean for whites was 1.28 and the mean for blacks was 1.55 which suggested another sharp division
along racial division on the issue of death penalty. This conclusion challenges the hypothesis three which states that
there is a substantial gap race gap between whites and blacks with whites supporting death penalty more than blacks. If
ANOVA scores of the means and standard deviations are true then, this constituted a partial rejection of the hypothesis
(H3), [there is a substantial race gap in support for death penalty with whites supporting death penalty more than
African Americans].
Table 6 (a) Analysis of Dependent Variable Favor or Oppose Death Penalty for Murder Using One- Way Anova
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Std. Error
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Minimum
Maximum
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
White
1061
1.28
.449
.014
1.25
1.31
1
2
Black Or African
American
198
1.55
.499
.035
1.48
1.62
1
2
American Indian Or
Alaska Native
18
1.33
.485
.114
1.09
1.57
1
2
Asian And Pacific
Islander American
46
1.39
.493
.073
1.24
1.54
1
2
Hispanic
65
1.55
.501
.062
1.43
1.68
1
2
Total
1388
1.34
.472
.013
1.31
1.36
1
2
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 17
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
Table 6 (b) Favor or oppose death penalty
ANOVA
Sum of squares
Df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
Between
Groups
15.784
4
3.946
18.598
.000
Within Groups
293.434
1383
.212
Total
309.218
1387
Table 7 (a) Analysis of Dependent Variables Favor or Oppose Death Penalty Using One-Way ANOVA
N
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
95% Confidence
Interval for Mean
Minimum
Maximum
Lower
Bound
Upper
Bound
Extremely Liberal
50
1.56
.501
.071
1.42
1.70
1
2
Liberal
178
1.55
.499
.037
1.48
1.62
1
2
Slightly Liberal
147
1.41
.494
.041
1.33
1.50
1
2
Moderate
499
1.32
.467
.021
1.28
1.36
1
2
Slghtly Conservative
191
1.29
.456
.033
1.23
1.36
1
2
Conservative
236
1.18
.387
.025
1.13
1.23
1
2
Extrmly Conservative
48
1.19
.394
.057
1.07
1.30
1
2
Total
1349
1.34
.473
.013
1.31
1.36
1
2
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 18
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
Table 7 (b) Favor or Oppose Death Penalty for Murder
ANOVA
Sum of Squares
Df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
Between Groups
18.726
6
3.121
14.810
.000
Within Groups
282.808
1342
.211
Total
301.534
1348
Conclusion
The results obtained through the analysis of three independent variables (educational level, political views, race) in
conjunction with the dependent variable (death penalty) partially supported the finding of the literature reviews. In the
review section, the findings suggested three fundamental outcomes of it findings. First, it acknowledged that there is a
relationship between one education level and his or her level of support toward death penalty. Gonzalez (2001)
concluded that level of support for death penalty declines as level of education increases. This finding is supported by
the result from the data analysis of educational level variable. Based on the results produced by SPSS Student
Software on education level, the findings confirmed that level of support toward death penalty decreases as one level
of education increases (Refer to table 3 (a) for more information on this relationship).
The SPSS data analysis on political views reflected what the literature reviews section suggested. Of the respondents
interviewed, it was found that level of support for death penalty was higher among those who considered themselves
conservatives (slightly conservatives = 70.7 %, conservatives = 81.8 %, extremely conservatives = 81.3 % and lower
among those who considered themselves liberals (extremely liberal = 44.0 %, slightly liberal = 44.9 %, liberal = 58.5
%). These results clearly confirmed that there is a relationship between one's education level and his or her attitude
toward death penalty. Third, data analysis on race produced mixed outcomes. First, it was found that both whites (72.1
%), American Indians (66.7 %) and Asian and Pacific Americans (60.9 %) highly favored death penalty compared to
blacks (44.9 %), and Hispanics (44.6).
Although these findings are consistent with the literature reviews findings, they also suggested that Americans of all
races are divided by the issue of death penalty for those convicted of murder crimes as the ANOVA analysis indicated.
The ANOVA analysis revealed partial rejection of hypothesis three. Based on scores of the means and standard
deviations, only hypothesis one and hypothesis two [the level of support for death penalty decreases as level of
education rises] were full supported and confirmed by the data analyses but still, there were some doubts about the
validities of these findings that supported the hypothesis one and two based on the ANOVA analyses. However, there
was mixed results over the issue of race. First, without ANOVA scores of the means and standard deviations finding
included, data produced by SPPS Student Version 18 supported hypothesis three (H3) [ there is a substantial race gap
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 19
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue5
in support for death penalty with whites supporting death penalty more than African Americans]. But when results
from ANOVA analyses of the scores and means were included, there was a different conclusion which suggested that
whites and blacks are evenly divided equally along racial lines on the issue of death penalty. In other words, ANOVA
findings suggested no racial group supports death penalty more than the other (s). Refer to table 8 (a & b) for more
details.
Table 8 (a) Analysis of Dependent Variable Favor or Oppose Death Penalty for Murder Using One- Way ANOVA
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Std. Error
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Mini
mum
Maximum
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Lt High
School
212
1.39
.488
.034
1.32
1.45
1
2
High
School
693
1.28
.450
.017
1.25
1.31
1
2
Junior
College
118
1.31
.466
.043
1.23
1.40
1
2
Bachelor
241
1.38
.486
.031
1.32
1.44
1
2
Graduate
134
1.49
.502
.043
1.40
1.57
1
2
Total
1398
1.34
.473
.013
1.31
1.36
1
2
Table 8 (b) Favor Or Oppose Death Penalty For Murder
ANOVA
Sum Of Squares
Df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
Between
Groups
6.068
4
1.517
6.908
.000
Within Groups
305.920
1393
.220
Total
311.989
1397
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 20
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue 5
Recommendation for Future Studies
The findings (results) from this report did not address few things. There was no way to know why those with higher
education level and conservatives possess such attitudes toward the death penalty for those convicted of murder
crimes. In the future, it is recommended that research be done on why conservatives show strong support for death
penalty and more importantly, why Americans with higher degrees oppose death penalty. Research like this would
give people clear understanding about death penalty debate. To better understand death penalty in relationship to
whites and blacks, it is recommended that a research be done in which both whites and blacks are independent
variables. This would provide better understanding pertaining rationales behind each racial group support certain
position on the death penalty debate in America. Doing so would help people understand the sharp division that
existed between whites and blacks over the death penalty discourse.
Nessa Publishers| www.nessapublisher.com Page 21
Journal of Social and Political Science Volume 1| Issue5
References
1. Gonzalez, P. Margaret. (2001). A model of decision making in capital juries. International Social Science
Review, 76(3-4), 79-91.
2. Healey, F. Joseph. (2009). Statistics: A tool for social Research. (Ed). Belmont CA: Wadsworth, Cengage
Learning.
3. Hurwitz Jon & Peffley Mark. (2007). Persuasion and resistance: Race and the death penalty in America.
American Journal of Political Science, 51(4), 996-1012. Retrieved January 15, 2018, from:
http://www.uky.edu/AS/PoliSci/Peffley/pdf/Peffley%20&%20Hurwitz%20Death%20Penalty%20ajps_293.pd
f
4. Newport, Frank. (2010). In U.S., 64% support death penalty in cases of murder. Retrieved January 15, 2018,
from: http://news.gallup.com/poll/144284/Support-Death-Penalty-Cases-Murder.aspx
5. Ogletree, J. Charles. (2002). Black man's burden: Race and the death penalty in America. Oregon Law
Review, 81, (1). Retrieved January 15, 2018, from: http://www.brown-watch.com/genocide-
watch/2012/11/10/ogletree-black-mans-burden-race-and-the-death-penalty-in-ame.html
6. Soss Joe, Langbein Lauran, Metelko R., Alan. (2003). Why do white Americans support the death penalty?
Journal of Politics, 65(2), 397-421. Retrieved January 14, 2018, from:
http://www.radford.edu/~junnever/articles/soss.pdf
7. SPSS, AN IMB Company. (2011). PASW Statistics Student Version 18.0 [SPASW Statistics]. Wadsworth
Cengage Learning.
