Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

The Stanford Prison Experiment

The Stanford Prison Experiment

The famous and controversial Stanford Prison Experiment, conducted by social psychologist Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues at Stanford University, demonstrated the power of social roles, social norms, and scripts.

Persuasion Strategies

Persuasion Strategies

Researchers have tested many persuasion strategies, including the foot-in-the door and the door-in-the-face techniques, in a variety of contexts. Ultimately, the principles are effective in selling products and changing people’s attitude, ideas, and behaviors (Cialdini & Goldstein, 2004).

Social Facilitation

Social Facilitation

Not all intergroup interactions lead to negative outcomes. Sometimes, being in a group situation can improve performance. Social facilitation occurs when an individual performs better when an audience is watching than when the individual performs the behavior alone. This typically occurs when people are performing a task for which they are skilled.

Randomized Experiments

Randomized Experiments

The randomization process involves assigning study participants randomly to experimental or control groups based on their probability of being equally assigned. Randomization is meant to eliminate selection bias and balance known and unknown confounding factors so that the control group is similar to the treatment group as much as possible. A computer program and a random number generator can be used to assign participants to groups in a way that minimizes bias.
Simple randomization
Simple...

Law of Effect

Law of Effect

B.F. Skinner, a prominent figure in behavioral psychology, introduced operant conditioning by emphasizing the role of consequences in shaping behavior. This theory builds upon the law of effect proposed by Edward Thorndike, which posits that behaviors followed by satisfying outcomes are likely to be repeated. In contrast, those followed by unsatisfying outcomes are less likely to recur.
Edward Thorndike's foundational work involved studying learning in animals, particularly using puzzle boxes...

Punishment

Punishment

Negative reinforcement and punishment are often confused but serve distinct functions in behavior modification. Reinforcement, whether positive or negative, increases the likelihood of a desired behavior, while punishment decreases it.
Punishment can be positive or negative. Positive punishment involves adding an undesirable stimulus, such as scolding, to decrease a behavior. Negative punishment involves removing a desirable stimulus, such as taking away a favorite toy, to decrease behavior.

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Reflections on Law and human behavior (1996-2005).

Law and human behavior·2026

Same author

Emotion regulation reduces victim blaming of vulnerable sex trafficking survivors.

Law and human behavior·2024

Same author

Judgments of sex trafficked women: The role of emotions.

Journal of experimental psychology. Applied·2024

Same author

Stereotypes and emotions as moderators of risk and race in judgments about juvenile probationers.

Journal of experimental psychology. Applied·2023

Same author

The public's judgment of sex trafficked women: Blaming the victim?

Journal of experimental psychology. Applied·2021

Same author

The objective prong in sexual harassment: What is the standard?

Law and human behavior·2018

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 13, 2026

Novel Apparatus and Method for Drug Reinforcement

Novel Apparatus and Method for Drug Reinforcement

Published on: August 20, 2010

Public support for sentencing reform: A policy-capturing experiment.

Trace C Vardsveen¹, Richard L Wiener¹

¹Department of Psychology.

Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied

|March 29, 2021

Summary

Punishment severity and sentence length are influenced by the magnitude of harm and the type of punishment (prison vs. probation). Harsher penalties are demanded more for probation sentences, indicating a prevalent retribution motive.

More Related Videos

An Experimental Analysis of Children's Ability to Provide a False Report about a Crime

An Experimental Analysis of Children's Ability to Provide a False Report about a Crime

Published on: May 3, 2016

A Procedure to Study Stress-Induced Relapse of Heroin Seeking after Punishment-Imposed Abstinence

A Procedure to Study Stress-Induced Relapse of Heroin Seeking after Punishment-Imposed Abstinence

Published on: March 23, 2022

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 13, 2026

Novel Apparatus and Method for Drug Reinforcement

Novel Apparatus and Method for Drug Reinforcement

Published on: August 20, 2010

An Experimental Analysis of Children's Ability to Provide a False Report about a Crime

An Experimental Analysis of Children's Ability to Provide a False Report about a Crime

Published on: May 3, 2016

A Procedure to Study Stress-Induced Relapse of Heroin Seeking after Punishment-Imposed Abstinence

A Procedure to Study Stress-Induced Relapse of Heroin Seeking after Punishment-Imposed Abstinence

Published on: March 23, 2022

Area of Science:

Psychology
Criminology
Legal Studies

Background:

Existing research links crime harm magnitude to punishment severity for prison sentences.
Many jurisdictions utilize probation, yet its impact on sentencing decisions is less understood.
Punishment justifications (retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation) inform sentencing.

Purpose of the Study:

To investigate how punishment type (prison vs. probation) influences sentence length decisions.
To examine the interplay between magnitude of harm, detection, and punishment type on sentencing.
To determine if punishment severity judgments mediate the effect of harm magnitude on sentence length.

Main Methods:

A two-session online experiment with 347 participants.
Session 1: Assessed support for punishment justifications.
Session 2: Participants evaluated scenarios varying in harm magnitude, detection likelihood, and punishment type (prison/probation).

Main Results:

Magnitude of harm significantly influenced punishment severity and sentence length.
Punishment type also affected sentence length decisions.
Punishment severity mediated harm's effect on sentence length, particularly in probation cases, indicating a greater demand for harsher punishment with probation.

Conclusions:

The type of punishment significantly impacts sentencing decisions beyond the magnitude of harm.
A retribution motive appears more prevalent when probation is considered for more severe crimes.
Understanding these factors is crucial for consistent and just sentencing practices.