Question

Assessing Polarisation

Give the class a short, 5-item attitude scale developed by your teacher to assess attitudes towards capital punishment. Based on their responses, divide the class into two groups, i.e. those pro-capital punishment and those anti-capital punishment. Now seat these groups into two different rooms and ask them to discuss a recent case in which death sentence has been given by the court. See how the discussion proceeds in the two groups. After the discussion, re-administer the attitude scale to the group members. Examine if, in both groups, positions have hardened in comparison to their initial position as a result of group discussion.

Answer 1

Sample 5-item attitude scale

Students rate each statement on a scale from 1 to 5 (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree).

1. Capital punishment is an effective deterrent against heinous crimes.
2. The justice system has a right to take away the life of individuals who commit extreme atrocities.
3. Life imprisonment without parole is a more humane and sufficient alternative than the death penalty.
4. Executing a criminal denies them any opportunity for psychological rehabilitation or reform.
5. Capital punishment is an outdated practice that has no place in a modern, civilised society.

Observation of the Separate Group Discussions

When the two segregated groups discuss a recent real-world death sentence case in separate rooms, their conversations follow distinct trajectories:

Room A: The Pro-Capital Punishment Group

• The Discussion: Members validate each other’s thoughts by focusing heavily on retributive justice, the suffering of the victims' families, and the need for public safety.
• The Dynamics: Arguments centred around leniency or systemic flaws are quickly brushed aside. Members present increasingly intense arguments to stand out as strong defenders of justice.

Room B: The Anti-Capital Punishment Group

• The Discussion: Members focus exclusively on human rights, the risk of executing an innocent person due to judicial error, and the ethical question of state-sanctioned killing.
• The Dynamics: Any counterargument regarding the cruelty of the criminal is minimized. The collective tone shifts toward deep systemic skepticism and reformative ethics.

Findings: Post-Discussion Re-Administration

When the 5-item scale is re-administered after the discussions, the data consistently reveals that positions have significantly hardened in both groups:

• The average score of the Pro-group increases noticeably toward the extreme “Strongly Agree” end for capital punishment.
• The average score of the Anti-group decreases noticeably toward the extreme “Strongly Disagree” end for capital punishment.