地区检察官如何感知正义的考察。

Jackie Chavez, S. Mathers
{"title":"地区检察官如何感知正义的考察。","authors":"Jackie Chavez, S. Mathers","doi":"10.18352/IJCA.257","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scholars have identified four primary types of justice: distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational. These four types of justice correspond, respectively, to the perceived fairness of one’s outcomes, to the perceived fairness of the procedures used to determine one’s outcomes, to the degree to which people are treated with dignity and respect, and to whether individuals receive complete, truthful, and timely explanations of procedures and decisions. A significant amount of criminal justice research has examined how perceptions of justice affect attitudes and behavior (Denver 2011). Understanding how district attorneys view justice gives insight into the decisions they make including how to dispose of cases, what charges to bring against defendants, what sentences to recommend, and even how victims should be treated throughout the court process. As noted by Colquitt (2001), a large number of studies have sought to link justice perceptions to a variety of organizational outcomes, including job satisfaction, organizational commitment, withdrawal, and organizational citizenship behavior (p. 425). Nonetheless, the extant literature is lacking on conceptualizations of justice related to jury trials. Since ensuring that justice prevails is the primary responsibility of the district attorney (Felkenes 1975), this study seeks to examine district attorneys’ perceptions of justice resulting from the use of jury trials.","PeriodicalId":37676,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Court Administration","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Examination of How District Attorneys Perceive Justice.\",\"authors\":\"Jackie Chavez, S. Mathers\",\"doi\":\"10.18352/IJCA.257\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Scholars have identified four primary types of justice: distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational. These four types of justice correspond, respectively, to the perceived fairness of one’s outcomes, to the perceived fairness of the procedures used to determine one’s outcomes, to the degree to which people are treated with dignity and respect, and to whether individuals receive complete, truthful, and timely explanations of procedures and decisions. A significant amount of criminal justice research has examined how perceptions of justice affect attitudes and behavior (Denver 2011). Understanding how district attorneys view justice gives insight into the decisions they make including how to dispose of cases, what charges to bring against defendants, what sentences to recommend, and even how victims should be treated throughout the court process. As noted by Colquitt (2001), a large number of studies have sought to link justice perceptions to a variety of organizational outcomes, including job satisfaction, organizational commitment, withdrawal, and organizational citizenship behavior (p. 425). Nonetheless, the extant literature is lacking on conceptualizations of justice related to jury trials. Since ensuring that justice prevails is the primary responsibility of the district attorney (Felkenes 1975), this study seeks to examine district attorneys’ perceptions of justice resulting from the use of jury trials.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37676,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal for Court Administration\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal for Court Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18352/IJCA.257\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Court Administration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18352/IJCA.257","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

学者们已经确定了四种主要的正义类型:分配正义、程序正义、人际正义和信息正义。这四种类型的正义分别对应于一个人的结果的感知公平性,对应于用于确定一个人结果的程序的感知公平,对应于人们受到尊严和尊重的程度,以及对应于个人是否得到对程序和决定的完整、真实和及时的解释。大量的刑事司法研究考察了对正义的感知如何影响态度和行为(丹佛,2011年)。了解地区检察官如何看待司法,可以深入了解他们所做的决定,包括如何处理案件,对被告提出什么指控,建议什么判决,甚至在整个法庭过程中应该如何对待受害者。正如Colquitt(2001)所指出的,大量研究试图将正义感与各种组织结果联系起来,包括工作满意度、组织承诺、退出和组织公民行为(第425页)。尽管如此,现存的文献缺乏与陪审团审判有关的司法概念。由于确保司法公正是地区检察官的首要责任(Felkenes 1975),本研究试图检验地区检察官对陪审团审判所产生的司法观念。
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
An Examination of How District Attorneys Perceive Justice.
Scholars have identified four primary types of justice: distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational. These four types of justice correspond, respectively, to the perceived fairness of one’s outcomes, to the perceived fairness of the procedures used to determine one’s outcomes, to the degree to which people are treated with dignity and respect, and to whether individuals receive complete, truthful, and timely explanations of procedures and decisions. A significant amount of criminal justice research has examined how perceptions of justice affect attitudes and behavior (Denver 2011). Understanding how district attorneys view justice gives insight into the decisions they make including how to dispose of cases, what charges to bring against defendants, what sentences to recommend, and even how victims should be treated throughout the court process. As noted by Colquitt (2001), a large number of studies have sought to link justice perceptions to a variety of organizational outcomes, including job satisfaction, organizational commitment, withdrawal, and organizational citizenship behavior (p. 425). Nonetheless, the extant literature is lacking on conceptualizations of justice related to jury trials. Since ensuring that justice prevails is the primary responsibility of the district attorney (Felkenes 1975), this study seeks to examine district attorneys’ perceptions of justice resulting from the use of jury trials.
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
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal for Court Administration (IJCA) is an on-line journal which focuses on contemporary court administration and management. It provides a platform for the professional exchange of knowledge, experience and research in those areas for a diverse audience of practitioners and academics. Its scope is international, and the editors welcome submissions from court officials, judges, justice ministry officials, academics and others whose professional, research projects, and interests lie in the practical aspects of the effective administration of justice. IJCA is an open access journal, and its articles are subjected to a double blind peer review procedure. Please contact the editors if you are not sure whether your research falls into these categories.
期刊最新文献
Anti-Corruption Transformation Processes in the Conditions of the Judicial Reform in Ukraine Implementation A Right to a Public Hearing in Times of Emergency – Online or Physical? Advantage and Risks of the Specialization of Courts in Social and Labor Disputes Recruitment of Judges in Kenya: The Intricacies of Gauging a Candidate’s Integrity The ‘Two Faces of Janus’ of the Portuguese Judicial System: Tradition and Modernization
×
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