The aims of punishment (deterrence, retribution, incapacitation and rehabilitation), how custodial and non-custodial sentences are used, and the psychological evidence on whether punishment reduces reoffending.

What this dot point is asking

OCR wants you to explain the aims of punishment (deterrence, retribution, incapacitation and rehabilitation), describe how custodial and non-custodial sentences are used, and evaluate the psychological evidence on whether punishment actually reduces reoffending.

The aims of punishment

• Deterrence: to put people off offending. Individual deterrence aims to stop the offender reoffending; general deterrence aims to warn others by making an example. This draws on operant conditioning: a punished behaviour should be less likely to be repeated.
• Retribution: to make the offender pay for their crime, satisfying society's sense that justice has been done and that the offender has "got what they deserved".
• Incapacitation: to remove the offender's ability to harm the public, most obviously by imprisoning them so they cannot offend against the community.
• Rehabilitation: to change the offender so they no longer want or need to offend, by tackling the causes of their crime (this overlaps with the reducing and preventing crime approaches such as anger management and education).

Custodial and non-custodial sentences

A custodial sentence is a prison sentence. It achieves incapacitation and retribution and is intended to deter, but it is expensive and removes the offender from normal life. A non-custodial sentence is served in the community: examples include fines, community service (unpaid work), probation and electronic tagging. Non-custodial sentences avoid the cost and the "school for crime" risk of prison and keep the offender in society, but provide less incapacitation and may be seen as too lenient.

Does punishment reduce reoffending?

The evidence is mixed. In favour, punishment can incapacitate (a person in prison cannot offend against the public), can satisfy society's need for retribution, and can deter when consequences are certain. Against, reoffending rates after prison are high in many countries, which suggests custodial punishment often fails to change behaviour. Prison can also act as a "school for crime", where offenders learn techniques and form criminal networks, and being labelled a criminal can trigger a self-fulfilling prophecy. Approaches that rehabilitate (anger management, education, restorative justice) tend to reduce reoffending more than punishment alone, because they tackle the causes of crime rather than just penalising it.

Evaluating punishment and rehabilitation

The strength of punishment is that it incapacitates dangerous offenders and gives society a sense of justice; its weakness is that, on its own, it often does not reduce reoffending and can make offenders worse. The strength of rehabilitation is that it addresses the causes of crime and so can produce lasting change; its weakness is that it relies on the offender's motivation and takes time and resources. Because crime has many causes, the most effective justice systems tend to combine punishment (for incapacitation and deterrence) with rehabilitation (to change behaviour).

Try this

Q1. Name the four aims of punishment. [4 marks]

• Cue. Deterrence, retribution, incapacitation and rehabilitation.

Q2. Explain the difference between individual and general deterrence. [2 marks]

• Cue. Individual deterrence stops the offender reoffending; general deterrence warns others by making an example.

Q3. Give one reason prison may fail to reduce reoffending. [2 marks]

• Cue. High reoffending rates, the "school for crime" effect, or the labelling that triggers a self-fulfilling prophecy.