With rising rates of violent crime, it is timely to examine the conditions under which people are more or less likely to obey the law. Research often finds different answers than public intuition and helps us to understand what works.

“Science has made the invisible behavioral code visible…Over the last four decades, scientific insights have revolutionized our understanding of how humans act and why they misbehave.” This book calls for applying those insights to the legal code.

The research, for example, clearly shows that certainly of punishment deters better than its severity. Yet the first reaction to high profile, outrageous crimes is to demand harsher penalties. Researchers find that when violators are detected fewer than 30 percent of the time, violations tend to increase. Likewise, violations decrease when more than 30 percent of violators are caught. One reason automated camera enforcement at red lights changes driver behavior is the high probability of detection and a fine.

Rooij and Fine conclude, “Altogether, there is no conclusive evidence that stricter punishments do or do not deter criminal behavior.” So the knee-jerk reaction to crime should focus on better ensuring that offenders are caught, rather than making penalties more harsh.

But the public likes punishment. There is evidence that humans are “biologically hardwired for punishment.” One study found that the dopamine system is activated when we punish others. “There is a focus on retributive justice, because people want to get even.”

Police visibility also has a sentinel effect in deterring crime. The perception of risk of being caught is what matters. Consequently, visible, high-profile enforcement deters better than secretive, low-profile enforcement. That’s why police checkpoints for DUI are effective deterrents, even when they don’t net many offenders. Lots of people see the checkpoints and therefore perceive a high risk of detection.

By the same token, there are crime hot spots where a small area generates the vast majority of police calls. Beefing up police presence in those areas reduces calls. “Studies find that investing in police is a much more efficient way to deter crime than investing in the prison system.”

People assume that imprisonment deters crime, even though recidivism rates after release typically exceed 50 percent. Systematic studies have found that formerly imprisoned persons re-offend much more frequently than those who committed similar crimes but were not imprisoned. In short, imprisonment actually has a criminogenic effect of increasing crime.

Does punishment of some deter others? Studies of three-strikes laws find a deterrent effect of between zero and 2 percent. Other studies find that three-strikes laws increase crime. In addition, people facing a third strike may be particularly violent to avoid apprehension since they have nothing to lose. If three-strikes laws do deter, however, the cost is high given how many offenders are incarcerated for life.

Does the death penalty deter? Studies have come down on both sides of that question. One persistent finding is that capital punishment has a brutalization effect that increases homicides. The National Research Council has twice stated that the research on deterrence is not dispositive.

When it comes to white collar crime, it is a truism among trial lawyers that the tort liability system helps to keep us safe. Trial lawyers argue that the larger the punitive damages, the better the deterrent. The evidence, however, is not so clearcut as they would have it. For many types of liability, including medical malpractice, car accidents, and product safety, “there is no conclusive evidence that tort liability acts” as a deterrent to keep people from engaging in risky behavior. Better to ensure that paying liability becomes inevitable and that injured parties have easy access to sue.

So, what works? An effective anti-crime program emphasizes the certainty of apprehension, the swiftness of punishment, and the communication of consequences to potential offenders. Publicity of punishment matters, which is why every April the IRS predictably releases information about people convicted for tax evasion.

Among the many other findings in the book are these:

• When people feel the legal system is fair, they are more likely to feel obligated to obey. Abusive law enforcement undermines the sense of fairness.

• When people are told that their peers are following the law, then they are more likely to do so themselves. Social norms are powerful forces that can be used to enhance compliance.

• Those with weaker self-control commit more crime. Self-control and critical reasoning can be improved, and recidivism reduced, via cognitive therapy that teaches detainees how to think.

• “A 2005 review of 214 studies on the relationship between poverty and crime found overwhelming evidence that more poverty leads to higher levels of crime but also that poverty is one of the strongest macro-level predictors of crime…This means that, to fight crime, we must address and relieve the root causes of poverty.”

• Changing situations to make crime harder to commit can greatly reduce crime. For example, nighttime public urination at Amsterdam’s Royal Palace was cut in half by switching the lights on.

• Crime peaks in adolescence, and the propensity for criminal behavior declines with age. A study of serious adolescent offenders found that after 7 years, only 9 percent continued to offend at high rates. Consequently, keeping young adults locked up for decades may not prevent many crimes since most would’ve aged out anyway.

• Corporate wrongdoing more often involves problems with the organizational culture rather than with a few bad apples. Compliance management and ethics programs help reduce wrongdoing by a small amount. Such programs can be window dressing to protect top management from blame.

The authors make a persuasive case that we should support policies that work, based upon scientific evidence, instead of policies that don’t work, and that may make things worse. Our legal system should rely more upon science, like medicine does, instead of upon traditional assumptions or on intuition. ‘That will actually keep us safe.” -30- ( )