Scholarly+articles

__Information __ Citation: Radelet, Michael L, and Marian J Borg. "The Changing Nature of Death Penalty  Debates." //JSTOR//. The Changing Nature of Death Penalty Debates, 200. Web. 10  May 2011. . Author’s credentials: Michael L. Radelet is a sociology professor at the University of Colorado at Boulder. He has published many scholarly books on capital punishment. Marian J. Borg is an Associate Professor and Undergraduate Coordinator in Sociology at the University of Virginia. She has a PhD in Sociology. Scope and purpose of the work: This piece is a persuasive piece that works to showing how social science scholarship is changing the ways Americans debate the death penalty. It tries to convince the reader to think the way the author’s think. Intended audience: The intended audience is those who have knowledge on capital punishment and have done research on the topic before. It is also intended for experts in the field. __Summary __ Identify the author’s thesis: The author’s thesis deals with viewing recent changes in public opinion regarding the death penalty and showing how through their analysis social science scholarship is changing the way Americans view the death Penalty, which may lead to the end of capital punishment. What are the main arguments?: The main arguments include the changing views on deterrence, incapacitation, caprice and bias, cost, innocence, and retribution, and their impact on capital punishment. __Evidence? __  A survey from 1995 of about 400 randomly selected police chiefs and county sheriffs throughout the United States. It found that about two-thirds of them did not think that capital punishment was more effective than imprisonment in deterring murder. In 1991 only 51 percent of Americans thought that the death penalty had deterrent effects, this percentage had been 11 percent higher in 1985. Lingering guilt is a major factor when sentencing a death penalty. In a trial 63 percent of respondents said it was very important in their punishment decisions and 69 percent said it made them less likely to vote in favor of the death sentence. __Evaluation __ Evaluation of research: The work is logical, clear, and well-researched. The authors are well qualified and know what they are talking about. They have obtained evidence from many sources and have done their research. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">Evaluation of scope: The topic has been adequately addressed. The work is easy to follow and the creators back up their thoughts with stats and evidence. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">Evaluation of author bias: The author is biased toward the views on capital punishment changing over the years and one day this will lead to the extinction of the death penalty. __<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Reflection __ <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"> This source is very helpful to my research. It gives me more information on how the views of the death penalty have changed over the years and what factors go into the views on it. It talks about the bias involved in the death penalty and how America’s views are changing gradually. The source gives a lot of evidence and statistics to support their thoughts and arguments, which provide me with a better understanding of capital punishment and the views on it. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">