• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >A comparison of two theoretical models of procedural justice in the context of child protection proceedings.
【24h】

A comparison of two theoretical models of procedural justice in the context of child protection proceedings.

机译：在儿童保护程序中比较两种程序正义的理论模型。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In this study, the researcher tested two theoretical models of justice in the context of child protection proceedings. Participants read a case file describing a hypothetical child neglect case. The file included the court petition, the caseworker's court report, a summary of the protective custody hearing, and the judge's final order. Within the case file, the researcher manipulated four variables: procedural treatment, interpersonal treatment, severity of child neglect, and assigned role (judge or parent). Results of confirmatory factor analyses suggested that a four-factor model of justice judgments best fit the data. Consistent with the organizational justice approach (Colquitt, 2001) the four latent justice factors were: procedural, distributive, interpersonal, and informational. Distributive justice had the strongest relationship to measured justice outcomes, significantly predicting decision satisfaction, leader evaluation, and predicted legal compliance. The results did not support the group engagement model (Tyler & Blader, 2003) in that perceptions of social identity did not mediate the relationships between procedural justice judgments and predicted legal compliance. Both severity of neglect and assigned decision-making role weakly moderated the relationships between justice judgments and outcomes. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for justice theory and child protection practice.
机译：在这项研究中，研究人员在儿童保护程序的背景下检验了两种正义的理论模型。参与者阅读了一个案例文件，其中描述了一个假设的儿童疏忽案例。文件包括法院请愿书，案件工作者的法院报告，保护性监护听证摘要以及法官的最终命令。在案件档案中，研究人员操纵了四个变量：程序治疗，人际关系治疗，儿童疏忽严重程度和分配的角色（法官或父母）。验证性因素分析的结果表明，司法判决的四因素模型最适合该数据。与组织正义方法（Colquitt，2001）一致，四个潜在的正义因素是：程序性，分配性，人际关系和信息性。分布式司法与衡量的司法结果之间的关系最密切，可以显着预测决策满意度，领导者评估和预测法律合规性。该结果不支持团体参与模型（Tyler＆Blader，2003），因为对社会身份的看法并未调解程序正义判断与预期法律遵从之间的关系。忽视的严重程度和分配的决策角色都弱化了司法判断与结果之间的关系。就其对司法理论和儿童保护实践的意义进行了讨论。

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