IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v178y2015i1p1-28.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hierarchical models for estimating state and demographic trends in US death penalty public opinion

Author

Listed:
  • Kenneth E. Shirley
  • Andrew Gelman

Abstract

type="main" xml:id="rssa12052-abs-0001"> One of the longest running questions that has been regularly included in US national public opinion polls is ‘Are you in favor of the death penalty for persons convicted of murder?’. Because the death penalty is governed by state laws rather than federal laws, it is of special interest to know how public opinion varies by state, and how it has changed over time within each state. We combine dozens of national polls taken over a 50-year span and fit a Bayesian multilevel logistic regression model to estimate support for the death penalty as a function of the year, the state, state level variables and various individual level demographic variables. Among our findings were that support levels in northeastern and southern states have moved in opposite directions over the past 50 years, support among blacks has decreased relative to non-blacks, but at slightly different rates for men and women, and support among some education groups varies widely by region. Throughout the paper, we highlight the use of a variety of analytical and graphical tools for model understanding, including average predictive comparisons, finite population contrasts for overparameterized models and graphical summaries of posterior distributions of group level variance parameters.

Suggested Citation

  • Kenneth E. Shirley & Andrew Gelman, 2015. "Hierarchical models for estimating state and demographic trends in US death penalty public opinion," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 178(1), pages 1-28, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:178:y:2015:i:1:p:1-28
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/rssa.2014.178.issue-1
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nehiba, Cody, 2018. "Give me 3': Do minimum distance passing laws reduce bicyclist fatalities?," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 9-20.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:178:y:2015:i:1:p:1-28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.