By Jesper Ryberg

The ethics of punishment constitutes an area of research that has recently been through a significant expansion, both in breadth and depth. But why is such research important? And how can it be conducted in the most fruitful way? In this article it is argued, first, that the study of penal ethics is important in order to inform penal practice. However, second, it is shown that there are both theoretical and political obstacles to the possibility of delivering genuine action guidance to practitioners. Finally, four recommendations are presented that may help to ensure that research within the ethics of punishment is carried out in a manner that is consistent with the basic justification for its very existence, namely that it is needed to provide moral guidance of penal practices in the real world.

Crim Law Forum 36, 191–204 (2025).

By Julianna M. Lynch, Jonathan D. Lane, Colleen M. BerryessaI, Joshua RottmanI

Evidence of perpetrators’ biological or situational circumstances has been increasingly brought to bear in courtrooms. Yet, research findings are mixed as to whether this informa- tion influences folk evaluations of perpetrators’ dispositions, and subsequently, evaluations of their deserved punishments. Previous research has not clearly dissociated the effects of information about perpetrators’ genetic endowment versus their environmental circum- stances. Additionally, most research has focused exclusively on violations involving extreme physical harm, often using mock capital sentences cases as examples. To address these gaps in the literature, we employed a “switched-at-birth” paradigm to investigate whether positive or negative information about perpetrators’ genetic or environmental backgrounds influence evaluations of a perpetrator’s mental states, character, and deserved punishment. Across three studies, we varied whether the transgression involved direct harm, an impure act that caused no harm, or a case of moral luck. The results indicate that negative genetic and environmental backgrounds influenced participants’ evaluations of perpetrators’ inten- tions, free will, and character, but did not influence participants’ punishment decisions. Overall, these results replicate and extend existing findings suggesting that perpetrators’ supposed extenuating circumstances may not mitigate the punishment that others assign to them.

PLoS ONE 14(10): e0224093. 2019, 20p.