Samenvatting

Does a better quality of arguing by a criminal judge why he/she metes out a certain punishment enhance the public’s understanding and endorsement of criminal verdicts? A sample of 235 Dutchmen got presented two verdicts in a within person design, one with a well motivated meting out of punishment, one with a defective motivation. Subjects reported on understanding and endorsement. Better motivated verdicts turn out to be better understood and are more endorsed.