• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Psychiatry, Psychology and Law >Is Justice Really Blind? Effects of Crime Descriptions, Defendant Gender and Appearance, and Legal Practitioner Gender on Sentences and Defendant Evaluations in a Mock Trial
【24h】

Is Justice Really Blind? Effects of Crime Descriptions, Defendant Gender and Appearance, and Legal Practitioner Gender on Sentences and Defendant Evaluations in a Mock Trial

机译：正义真的是盲人吗？犯罪描述，被告性别和容貌以及法律执业者性别对模拟审判中句子和被告评估的影响

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

Two experiments were conducted to investigate how sources of information can bias the judicial process. Experiment 1 investigated the effects of photographs of victims' injury, and of vivid verbal victim injury description, on the evaluation and sentencing of a defendant in a mock criminal trial. The participants were presented with five different crime accounts: (a) vandalism, (b) arson, (c) child abuse, (d) child molestation, and (e) homicide, all committed by male perpetrators, and were asked to evaluate the trustworthiness, culpability, aggressiveness, guilt, and other crime-relevant personality traits of the defendant, and to set imprisonment sentences. Results of Experiment 1 showed that exposure to photographs of crime victim injuries as well as vivid crime descriptions had only weak and non-significant effects on defendant evaluations, but imprisonment terms tended to be longer in the Photo condition than in the No photo condition. To further investigate the possible effects of photographic information on judicial processes for different crimes (child molestation, child abuse, homicide), Experiment 2 was conducted with legal practitioners (judges, members of Swedish juries, law students, counsels for the defence, prosecutors, police officers) as evaluators. Results showed three tendencies: (a) a “same-sex penalty effect”: sentencing evaluators (judges, jurors) evaluated a defendant of the same gender as the evaluator, more harshly than one of the opposite gender, (b) a “male penalty effect”: non-sentencing evaluators (police officers, counsels for the defence, prosecutors, and law students) evaluated and judged a male defendant more harshly than a female, and (c) for female non-sentencing evaluators, the male penalty effect was enhanced for the more attractive defendants. Overall, the results suggest that defendant gender, defendant appearance, evaluator gender, and evaluator profession can affect the outcome of a criminal trial.View full textDownload full textKey wordsappearance, crime victim injury, defendant, gender, photograph, prejudice, sentence, vividnessRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13218710903566896
机译：进行了两个实验，以调查信息源如何使司法程序产生偏差。实验1调查了受害人受伤的照片和生动的受害人口头描述对模拟刑事审判中被告的评估和判刑的影响。为参与者提供了五种不同的犯罪记录：（a）故意破坏，（b）纵火，（c）虐待儿童，（d）mole亵儿童和（e）凶杀，这些都是由男性施暴者犯下的，并被要求评估犯罪行为。被告的可信赖性，罪魁祸首，进取心，内和其他与犯罪有关的人格特质，并处以徒刑。实验1的结果表明，暴露犯罪受害人的照片以及生动的犯罪描述对被告的评价仅具有微弱的影响，而无显着影响，但是在“有照片”条件下的监禁期限往往比“无照片”条件下的监禁期限更长。为了进一步调查摄影信息对不同罪行（mole亵儿童，虐待儿童，杀人罪）司法程序的可能影响，我们对法律从业人员（法官，瑞典陪审团成员，法学院学生，辩护律师，检察官，警察）作为评估员。结果显示出三种趋势：（a）“同性刑罚效应”：量刑评估者（法官，陪审员）对与评估者相同性别的被告进行了比对异性之一更为严厉的评估，（b） “男性惩罚效应”：不判刑的评估者（警务人员，辩护律师，检察官和法学院学生）对男性被告的审判和判决要比女性更为严厉，并且（c）对女性不判刑评估人员，对于更具吸引力的被告，男性惩罚效果得到了增强。总的来说，这些结果表明被告性别，被告人的外貌，评估人性别和评估人的职业可能会影响刑事审判的结果。查看全文下载全文关键词外观，犯罪受害者的伤害，被告人，性别，照片，偏见，句子，生动程度相关变量addthis_config = {ui_cobrand：“泰勒和弗朗西斯在线”，servicescompact：“ citeulike，netvibes，twitter，technorati，delicious，linkedin，facebook，stumbleupon，digg，google，更多”，发布：“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b”};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13218710903566896

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 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