Uncertain evidence changed views on imprisoning immigrants, not deporting them

A U.S. survey experiment found that people were more willing to overlook possible mistakes when deciding whether immigrants should be removed from the country.

Editorial illustration — not from the study.

Researchers presented U.S. adults with scenarios involving immigrants from Syria, China, Russia or Mexico who were arrested for either felony drug offenses or misdemeanor trespassing. The scenarios also varied whether the person had a valid work visa or an expired tourist visa, and whether the witness evidence was certain or uncertain.

Visa status was associated with both deportation and imprisonment preferences. But uncertainty about the evidence affected imprisonment preferences only: respondents became less supportive of imprisonment when the witness was uncertain, while their deportation preferences did not change.

What changed people’s views

The study found that respondents considered legality when judging both whether an immigrant should be deported and whether the person should be imprisoned. People were less supportive of imprisonment when the evidence came from an uncertain witness. The same uncertainty had no effect on deportation preferences, suggesting greater tolerance for possible errors when deciding whether an immigrant should be removed from the country.

Why the distinction matters

The findings suggest that views about punishment can be shaped by an immigrant’s immigration status even when the person is being processed for a separate criminal offense. They also indicate that Americans may apply different standards of uncertainty to imprisonment and deportation, with deportation preferences less affected by doubts about the evidence.

Evidence and caveats

The study used a 4-by-2-by-2-by-2 online survey experiment with a national sample of U.S. adults. Participants responded to hypothetical cases that varied the immigrant’s country of origin, the seriousness of the alleged offense, the certainty of the witness evidence and visa status. The study measured stated preferences rather than actual decisions or behavior. The abstract does not provide the sample size or details about how closely the participants matched the wider U.S. population, so the findings’ broader generalizability cannot be assessed from the available information.

Tuna and billfish fishing moved offshore mainly in the past 200 years

People have fished for tuna for about 44,000 years and billfish for about 10,000 years, according to a global review of archaeological evidence. But sustained, intensive fishing in offshore and oceanic waters appears to have developed mainly during the past 200 years.

9 hours ago·4 views

Abstract editorial illustration accompanying the article: Coastal residents weigh flood damage, costs and family ties when considering a move

Society & Economics

Coastal residents weigh flood damage, costs and family ties when considering a move

People considering whether to leave flood-prone coastal communities weigh disastrous flooding and rising costs alongside crime, healthcare and proximity to family and friends. In a survey of 182 respondents, most said they would not relocate, while others said they would move immediately or in the future.

17 hours ago·6 views

Society & Economics

Managers accepted reflective coaching from humans but wanted answers from AI

A study of eight managers found that they preferred human coaches for reflective questioning, even though they welcomed that approach from a person. When the same coaching protocol came from an AI system, they wanted it to provide answers instead.

1 day ago·18 views