Consider a person who is convicted of a misdemeanor. It is their first offense. Should that person be punished to the full extent of the law, or dealt with more leniently? Depending on one’s prejudices, a theoretical case can be made for either approach. Lenient treatment has a risk of causing the offender, along with anyone who hears about the lenient treatment, to believe that penalties for transgression are low or nonexistent, and in this way may encourage future transgressions. Harsh treatment, including jail time, has a risk of leading to additional consequences like loss of a job and restricted future employment possibilities, as well as exposing the first-time offender to seasoned recidivists. On average and for the population as a whole, what does the empirical evidence say? Jennifer Doleac presents some evidence in “What Becomes of Second Chances?” (Behavioral Scientist, March 24, 2026). She points to a study that she has conducted with Amanda Agan and Anna Harvey based on…
No comments yet. Log in to reply on the Fediverse. Comments will appear here.