In Defense of the Right to Life: Analyzing Factors Affecting Filipino Opinion About Death Penalty stated that the media has a role in the perceived rising crime rates, which affects the support for harsher punishments despite the statistics stating otherwise.35 Television is the main source of news in the Philippines and Internet has become a cheap and accessible alternative source. Access to news on television was measured by frequency of use. Responses ranged from daily to never. Responses were recoded to 1=with access to TV news, and 0=without access to TV news. Internet use was also measured by frequency of use. Responses ranged from daily to never. Responses were recoded to 1=Internet user, and 0=non-Internet user. ii. Instrumental factors The instrumental response hypothesis is a crime-centered, utilitarian explanatory perspective in explaining support for the death penalty.36 Tyler and Weber (1982) argued that support for the death penalty is driven by the public’s desire to lower crime rates.37 High crime rates may lead to heightened fear of crime/being victimized by crime or insecurity, consequently resulting to increased public demand or willingness to impose strict social controls, harsher punishments, or the death penalty, so as to deter crime. In this model, death penalty deters crime and makes people feel safe and secure. Instrumental factors may be experiential or knowledgebased (Sato, 2011).38 Experiential refers to personal experience of crime victimization, while knowledge-based factors are perceptions on the utility of the death penalty as a deterrent. Examples of knowledge- based instrumental factors are perceptions that the death penalty is effective in deterring crime or in making people safe, and fear of crime. Deterrence is perhaps the most frequently cited justification for supporting the death penalty39 as well as for opposing it.40 The doctrine of deterrence assumes that a punishment like the death penalty has a deterrent effect if the punishment of offenders – whether real or perceived – discourages or deters potential offenders from the committing the same crime.41 Deterrence is the main reason for support for the death penalty in Japan.42 A review by Sato (2014) and Stack (2004) found that there were very few studies showing positive link of fear of crime and support for the death penalty, and some were mixed results.43 Some found that personal experience of crime or fear of crime did not necessarily lead to punitiveness or support for punitive actions such as the death penalty (Gross, 1998; Sims and Johnston, 2004; Tyler & Weber 1982; Unnever, Cullen and Fisher, 2007).44 In contrast, a review by Applegate, Cullen, and Fisher (2002) found that fear of crime or being victimized was positively related to support for the death penalty, increased harshness of punishments, and greater punitiveness. A study of Canadian publics (Hartnagel & Templeton, 2012) also found that a combination of emotions of fear and anger were found to have some limited yet direct effect on punitiveness.45 Four instrumental factors were analyzed in the paper – two experiential and two knowledgeDavid Niven, Bolstering an Illusory Majority: The Effects of the Media’s Portrayal of Death Penalty Support, 83(3) Soc. Sci. Q. 671 (2002). 35 ROBERTS, ET AL., supra note 14. 36 Stack (2004), supra note 8. 37 Tyler & Weber (1982), supra note 24. 38 SATO (2011), supra note 18. 39 HOOD & HOYLE, supra note 23. 40 Bohm (1987), infra note 50. 41 TERRENCE D. MIETHE & HONG LU. PUNISHMENT: A COMPARATIVE HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE (2005). 42 Shianhe Jiang, Rebecca Pilot, & Toyoji Saito, Why Japanese Support the Death Penalty? International 20(3) Crim. Justice Rev. 302 (2010). 43 Stack (2004), supra note 8. 44 Samuel R. Gross, Update: American Public Opinion on the Death Penalty-It’s Getting Personal, 83(1) Cornell L. Rev. 1448 (1998); Tyler & Webber (1982), supra note 24; James D. Unnever & Francis T. Cullen, The Racial Divide in Support for the Death Penalty: Does White Racism Matter?, 85(3) Soc. Forces 1281 (2007); Barbara Sims & Eric Johnston, Examining Public Opinion about Crime and Justice: A Statewide Study, 15(3) Crim. Justice Policy Rev., 270–293 (2004). 45 Timothy F. Hartnagel & Laura J. Templeton, Emotions About Crime and Attitudes to Punishment. 14(4) Punish. Soc. 452 (2012). 34 9