Cargando…

Justification of Sentencing Decisions: Development of a Ratio-Based Measure Tested on Child Neglect Cases

Theoretically, people’s justification of a sentencing decision involves a hybrid structure comprising retribution, incapacitation, general deterrence, and rehabilitation. In this study, a new ratio-type measure was developed to assess this structure and was tested to detect changes in the weighting...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Watamura, Eiichiro, Ioku, Tomohiro, Wakebe, Toshihiro
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8796961/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35095646
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.761536
_version_ 1784641434770472960
author Watamura, Eiichiro
Ioku, Tomohiro
Wakebe, Toshihiro
author_facet Watamura, Eiichiro
Ioku, Tomohiro
Wakebe, Toshihiro
author_sort Watamura, Eiichiro
collection PubMed
description Theoretically, people’s justification of a sentencing decision involves a hybrid structure comprising retribution, incapacitation, general deterrence, and rehabilitation. In this study, a new ratio-type measure was developed to assess this structure and was tested to detect changes in the weighting of justification according to the content emphasized in a particular crime. Two child neglect scenarios were presented to participants, where they read either a severe-damage scenario (where a single mother’s selfish neglect caused her son’s death) or a moderate-damage scenario (where a single mother became apathetic due to economic deprivation and caused her child’s debilitation). Participants then indicated the proportion of importance they placed on each justification in determining the defendant’s punishment, with an overall proportion of 100%, along with responding to the sentence on an 11-point scale. This study involved a two-factor analysis of variance for justification ratios, a t-test for the sentence, and a multiple regression analysis with three demographic variables, the four justifications as independent variables, and the sentence as the dependent variable. The ratio of retribution to rehabilitation was reversed depending on the scenario: in the severe-damage scenario, retribution was weighted highest at 27.0% and rehabilitation was weighted at only 19.0%. By contrast, in the moderate-damage scenario, rehabilitation had the highest weighting of about 26.2%, while retribution was weighted at 21.5%. The sentence was more severe in the severe-damage scenario. Multiple regression analysis suggested that in the severe-damage scenario, most participants failed to deviate from choosing retribution by default and decided on heavier sentences, while some who considered rehabilitation and incapacitation opted for lighter sentences. The present measure succeeded in detecting changes in the weighting of justification, which can be difficult to detect with common Likert Scales. In addition, it was found that not only retribution but utilitarian justification was considered in the sentencing decisions of serious cases.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8796961
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87969612022-01-29 Justification of Sentencing Decisions: Development of a Ratio-Based Measure Tested on Child Neglect Cases Watamura, Eiichiro Ioku, Tomohiro Wakebe, Toshihiro Front Psychol Psychology Theoretically, people’s justification of a sentencing decision involves a hybrid structure comprising retribution, incapacitation, general deterrence, and rehabilitation. In this study, a new ratio-type measure was developed to assess this structure and was tested to detect changes in the weighting of justification according to the content emphasized in a particular crime. Two child neglect scenarios were presented to participants, where they read either a severe-damage scenario (where a single mother’s selfish neglect caused her son’s death) or a moderate-damage scenario (where a single mother became apathetic due to economic deprivation and caused her child’s debilitation). Participants then indicated the proportion of importance they placed on each justification in determining the defendant’s punishment, with an overall proportion of 100%, along with responding to the sentence on an 11-point scale. This study involved a two-factor analysis of variance for justification ratios, a t-test for the sentence, and a multiple regression analysis with three demographic variables, the four justifications as independent variables, and the sentence as the dependent variable. The ratio of retribution to rehabilitation was reversed depending on the scenario: in the severe-damage scenario, retribution was weighted highest at 27.0% and rehabilitation was weighted at only 19.0%. By contrast, in the moderate-damage scenario, rehabilitation had the highest weighting of about 26.2%, while retribution was weighted at 21.5%. The sentence was more severe in the severe-damage scenario. Multiple regression analysis suggested that in the severe-damage scenario, most participants failed to deviate from choosing retribution by default and decided on heavier sentences, while some who considered rehabilitation and incapacitation opted for lighter sentences. The present measure succeeded in detecting changes in the weighting of justification, which can be difficult to detect with common Likert Scales. In addition, it was found that not only retribution but utilitarian justification was considered in the sentencing decisions of serious cases. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8796961/ /pubmed/35095646 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.761536 Text en Copyright © 2022 Watamura, Ioku and Wakebe. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Watamura, Eiichiro
Ioku, Tomohiro
Wakebe, Toshihiro
Justification of Sentencing Decisions: Development of a Ratio-Based Measure Tested on Child Neglect Cases
title Justification of Sentencing Decisions: Development of a Ratio-Based Measure Tested on Child Neglect Cases
title_full Justification of Sentencing Decisions: Development of a Ratio-Based Measure Tested on Child Neglect Cases
title_fullStr Justification of Sentencing Decisions: Development of a Ratio-Based Measure Tested on Child Neglect Cases
title_full_unstemmed Justification of Sentencing Decisions: Development of a Ratio-Based Measure Tested on Child Neglect Cases
title_short Justification of Sentencing Decisions: Development of a Ratio-Based Measure Tested on Child Neglect Cases
title_sort justification of sentencing decisions: development of a ratio-based measure tested on child neglect cases
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8796961/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35095646
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.761536
work_keys_str_mv AT watamuraeiichiro justificationofsentencingdecisionsdevelopmentofaratiobasedmeasuretestedonchildneglectcases
AT iokutomohiro justificationofsentencingdecisionsdevelopmentofaratiobasedmeasuretestedonchildneglectcases
AT wakebetoshihiro justificationofsentencingdecisionsdevelopmentofaratiobasedmeasuretestedonchildneglectcases