...
首页> 外文期刊>Legal and criminological psychology >Investigating the relationship between justice-vengeance motivations and punitive sentencing recommendations
【24h】

Investigating the relationship between justice-vengeance motivations and punitive sentencing recommendations

机译:调查司法复仇动机与惩罚性量刑建议之间的关系

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The present research investigated the relationship between underlying justice and vengeance motivations and sentencing recommendations made by expert clinicians, semi-experts, and lay-people. It was hypothesized that the semi-experts would recommend significantly different sentence lengths from those recommended by the expert and lay-person groups, in line with previous research findings. It was also hypothesized that justice and vengeance motivations would be related to punitive sentencing recommendations, and that these would not be the same across the three levels of expertise. Method. An independent groups design was utilized in the main analysis, with participants belonging to three distinct levels of clinical experience (experts, semi-experts, and lay-people). A questionnaire was administered, with participants being measured on levels of justice and vengeance motivations, and asked to recommend appropriate sentence lengths based on nine separate crime-scenarios. These covariables were correlated and the correlation coefficients were compared across the three levels of expertise. Results. The former hypothesis was not upheld. Findings do, however, support the latter hypothesis, with the key finding indicating that for both justice and vengeance motivations in punitive judgement, it is the lay-participants who appear distinct from the experts and semi-experts. Conclusions. The current findings emphasize that while expert and lay-person judgements may often appear to be the same, different processes and motivations underlying clinical judgements are occurring at the different stages of expertise. With the differences in the relationships between justice and vengeance motivations and judgements found in the current research, it is argued that expert and lay judgements that appear to be the same are, in fact, distinguishable and are related to quite different underlying motivations and decision-making processes.
机译:本研究调查了潜在的正义与复仇动机与专家临床医生,半专家和非专业人士提出的量刑建议之间的关系。据推测,与以前的研究结果相一致,准专家建议的句子长度与专家和非专业人员的建议的句子长度明显不同。还假设司法和复仇动机与惩罚性量刑建议有关,而在三个专业知识水平上这些建议并不相同。方法。在主要分析中采用了独立的小组设计,参与者属于三个不同级别的临床经验(专家,半专家和非专业人员)。进行了问卷调查,对参与者的司法和复仇动机进行了衡量,并要求他们根据九种单独的犯罪场景建议适当的句子长度。这些协变量是相关的,并且在三个专业水平上比较了相关系数。结果。以前的假设没有得到支持。但是,调查结果确实支持后一种假设,关键结论表明,对于惩罚性判断中的正义动机和复仇动机而言,非专业参与者与专家和半专家截然不同。结论当前的研究结果强调,尽管专家和外行的判断通常看起来是相同的,但在专业知识的不同阶段,临床判断所依据的不同过程和动机却不同。由于当前研究中发现的正义与复仇动机与判断之间的关系存在差异,因此认为专家和外行判断似乎相同,实际上是可区分的,并且与完全不同的潜在动机和决策相关,制作过程。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号