Differences and similarities in attitudes and beliefs of psychologists and judges on accountability in juvenile offenders.

摘要

The purpose of this study was to examine the differences and similarities between psychologists' and judges' attitudes and beliefs on juvenile offender accountability. A national sample of judges (N = 202) and psychologists (N = 319) completed a four-page questionnaire, which assessed views on juvenile offender accountability, differences on 19 decision-making factors, the age at which participants would execute juvenile offenders, and demographic variables.; The study findings indicated that judges had more conservative beliefs, were more likely to hold juvenile offenders accountable, and were more in favor of executing juvenile offenders than were psychologists. In comparison, psychologists had less punitive attitudes and more liberal beliefs. Due to their educational background and role in the legal system, judges and psychologists placed different levels of importance on certain risk assessment factors (e.g., substance abuse, criminal history, family problems) in their decision-making process. Results showed that participants who knew less about the decision-making factors supported by social science research had a more disciplinary stance toward juvenile offenders and were more likely to recommend execution and executing juvenile offenders at a younger age. Participants with more liberal views were less likely to execute juvenile offenders at a younger age. The mean age of execution was 15 years for the 61.5% of participants who said they would consider the death penalty as a sentencing option for juveniles. The demographic variables revealed that age and race differences were not significant; however, females were found to be less punitive against juvenile offenders and less likely to execute juvenile offenders than were males.; The researcher suggested that new assessment instruments and legal and psychological training programs could be developed using these findings to decrease the impact that psychologists' and judges' personal attitudes and beliefs have on the decision-making process to determine juvenile offender accountability, if a juvenile offender is determined accountable, where he or she is placed, and the type of sentence given.