用确定性认知和合法性信念调解法院程序正义与不公正之间的关系。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q1 LAW International Journal of Law and Psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-10-23 DOI:10.1016/j.ijlp.2024.102031
Glenn D. Walters
{"title":"用确定性认知和合法性信念调解法院程序正义与不公正之间的关系。","authors":"Glenn D. Walters","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2024.102031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>A mediation analysis was performed with perceptual and cognitive mediators to investigate the effect of court procedural justice on subsequent delinquency. The hypothesis tested in this study held that court procedural justice would promote a change in perceived certainty of punishment, a change in perceived certainty would foster change in institutional legitimacy, and institutional legitimacy would lead to a reduction in offending. This two-mediator model was tested in a sample of 1354 (1170 males, 184 females) serious delinquent youth from the Pathways to Desistance study. Results from a four-equation causal mediation analysis revealed that a significant pathway ran from strong court procedural justice perceptions to increased certainty of punishment to high institutional legitimacy to low delinquency. Conversely, there was no evidence of a significant pathway running from strong certainty of punishment to increased court procedural justice to high institutional legitimacy to low delinquency. These results provide insight into how strong perceptions of court procedural justice may indirectly contribute to decreased delinquency over time, while offering clues on how this process can be managed with policy initiatives and treatment interventions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"97 ","pages":"Article 102031"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mediating the court procedural justice–delinquency relationship with certainty perceptions and legitimacy beliefs\",\"authors\":\"Glenn D. Walters\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijlp.2024.102031\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>A mediation analysis was performed with perceptual and cognitive mediators to investigate the effect of court procedural justice on subsequent delinquency. The hypothesis tested in this study held that court procedural justice would promote a change in perceived certainty of punishment, a change in perceived certainty would foster change in institutional legitimacy, and institutional legitimacy would lead to a reduction in offending. This two-mediator model was tested in a sample of 1354 (1170 males, 184 females) serious delinquent youth from the Pathways to Desistance study. Results from a four-equation causal mediation analysis revealed that a significant pathway ran from strong court procedural justice perceptions to increased certainty of punishment to high institutional legitimacy to low delinquency. Conversely, there was no evidence of a significant pathway running from strong certainty of punishment to increased court procedural justice to high institutional legitimacy to low delinquency. These results provide insight into how strong perceptions of court procedural justice may indirectly contribute to decreased delinquency over time, while offering clues on how this process can be managed with policy initiatives and treatment interventions.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47930,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"97 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102031\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252724000803\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252724000803","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究利用感知和认知中介进行了中介分析,以研究法庭程序公正对后续犯罪的影响。本研究测试的假设认为,法庭程序公正会促进感知到的惩罚确定性的改变,感知到的确定性的改变会促进制度合法性的改变,制度合法性的改变会导致犯罪的减少。这个双中介模型在 "脱罪之路"(Pathways to Desistance)研究的 1354 名(男性 1170 人,女性 184 人)严重犯罪青少年样本中进行了测试。四方程因果中介分析的结果表明,从强烈的法院程序正义感到惩罚的确定性增加,再到机构的高度合法性,最后到低犯罪率之间存在一条重要的路径。相反,没有证据表明,从强烈的惩罚确定性到增强的法庭程序公正性,再到高制度合法性,最后到低犯罪率之间存在一条重要的路径。这些结果让我们了解到,对法庭程序公正的强烈认知可能间接导致犯罪率随着时间的推移而下降,同时也为如何通过政策措施和治疗干预来管理这一过程提供了线索。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mediating the court procedural justice–delinquency relationship with certainty perceptions and legitimacy beliefs
A mediation analysis was performed with perceptual and cognitive mediators to investigate the effect of court procedural justice on subsequent delinquency. The hypothesis tested in this study held that court procedural justice would promote a change in perceived certainty of punishment, a change in perceived certainty would foster change in institutional legitimacy, and institutional legitimacy would lead to a reduction in offending. This two-mediator model was tested in a sample of 1354 (1170 males, 184 females) serious delinquent youth from the Pathways to Desistance study. Results from a four-equation causal mediation analysis revealed that a significant pathway ran from strong court procedural justice perceptions to increased certainty of punishment to high institutional legitimacy to low delinquency. Conversely, there was no evidence of a significant pathway running from strong certainty of punishment to increased court procedural justice to high institutional legitimacy to low delinquency. These results provide insight into how strong perceptions of court procedural justice may indirectly contribute to decreased delinquency over time, while offering clues on how this process can be managed with policy initiatives and treatment interventions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.70%
发文量
54
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Law and Psychiatry is intended to provide a multi-disciplinary forum for the exchange of ideas and information among professionals concerned with the interface of law and psychiatry. There is a growing awareness of the need for exploring the fundamental goals of both the legal and psychiatric systems and the social implications of their interaction. The journal seeks to enhance understanding and cooperation in the field through the varied approaches represented, not only by law and psychiatry, but also by the social sciences and related disciplines.
期刊最新文献
The response of the secretary of state and the “supervised discharge” provision of the UK mental health bill 2022: Potential problems and opportunities in the wake of Secretary of State for Justice v MM [2018] UKSC 60 Capacity and incapacity: An appropriate border for non-consensual interventions? Child maltreatment and suicidal ideation among justice–and welfare–involved adolescents in Nigeria: Investigating the mediating role of social support and emotion regulation Recent research involving consent, alcohol intoxication, and memory: Implications for expert testimony in sexual assault cases Comparison of sociodemographic, clinical, and alexithymia characteristics of schizophrenia patients with and without criminal records
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1