• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

探索研究量刑决策的方法。

Exploring methods to investigate sentencing decisions.

机构信息

MRC Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Robinson Way, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Eval Rev. 2010 Jun;34(3):185-219. doi: 10.1177/0193841X10369624.

DOI:10.1177/0193841X10369624
PMID:20479212
Abstract

The determinants of sentencing are of much interest in criminal justice and legal research. Understanding the determinants of sentencing decisions is important for ensuring transparent, consistent, and justifiable sentencing practice that adheres to the goals of sentencing, such as the punishment, rehabilitation, deterrence, and incapacitation of the offender, as well as reparation for the victim. It is important to frame research questions on sentencing that can feasibly be answered by appropriate research methods, within the constraints of limited time and resources. For illustration, this article presents three methodological approaches for investigating the factors that may influence sentencing decisions: multilevel analysis using existing sentencing data; sampling of, and data collection from, sentenced court case files; and experimental designs involving sentencers deciding on hypothetical cases. The strengths and weaknesses of each approach are compared and discussed.

摘要

量刑的决定因素在刑事司法和法律研究中备受关注。了解量刑决定的决定因素对于确保量刑实践具有透明度、一致性和合理性至关重要,这种实践符合量刑的目标,例如惩罚、改造、威慑和使罪犯丧失能力,以及对受害者进行赔偿。重要的是,要提出能够通过适当的研究方法在有限的时间和资源限制内回答的量刑研究问题。例如,本文提出了三种研究方法来调查可能影响量刑决定的因素:使用现有量刑数据进行多层次分析;对判刑案件档案进行抽样和数据收集;以及涉及判刑者对假设案件做出决定的实验设计。比较并讨论了每种方法的优缺点。

相似文献

1
Exploring methods to investigate sentencing decisions.探索研究量刑决策的方法。
Eval Rev. 2010 Jun;34(3):185-219. doi: 10.1177/0193841X10369624.
2
Experiences of Sentencing and the Pains of Punishment: Prisoners' Perspectives.量刑经历与惩罚之痛:囚犯的视角
Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol. 2025 Jan;69(1):79-101. doi: 10.1177/0306624X221148127. Epub 2023 Jan 19.
3
Crime and punishment in Saudi Arabia: Lashing, imprisonment, and other unusual punishments.沙特阿拉伯的犯罪与惩罚:鞭笞、监禁及其他特殊惩罚。
Child Abuse Negl. 2023 Jan;135:105948. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2022.105948. Epub 2022 Nov 14.
4
Life-sentenced juveniles: Public perceptions of risk and need for incarceration.被判处终身监禁的青少年:公众对风险的认知以及监禁需求
Behav Sci Law. 2018 Sep;36(5):587-596. doi: 10.1002/bsl.2377. Epub 2018 Oct 8.
5
The relationship between victim impact statements and judicial decision making: An archival analysis of sentencing outcomes.受害者影响陈述与司法决策之间的关系:量刑结果的档案分析。
Law Hum Behav. 2023 Aug;47(4):484-498. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000535. Epub 2023 Jun 22.
6
Impact of information about sentencing decisions on public attitudes toward the criminal justice system.量刑决定信息对公众对刑事司法系统态度的影响。
Law Hum Behav. 2001 Oct;25(5):515-28. doi: 10.1023/a:1012844932754.
7
Mental health and sentencing: How are judicial decisions made in light of the judgement of R v Vowles?心理健康与量刑:根据R诉沃尔斯案的判决,司法判决是如何做出的?
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2025 Mar-Apr;99:102071. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2025.102071. Epub 2025 Feb 10.
8
Bio-behavioral scientific evidence alters judges' sentencing decision-making: A quantitative analysis.生物-行为科学证据改变法官的量刑决策:定量分析。
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2024 Jul-Aug;95:102007. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2024.102007. Epub 2024 Jul 10.
9
Reactions to mandatory sentences in relation to the ethnic identity and criminal history of the offender.对与罪犯种族身份和犯罪历史相关的强制性判决的反应。
Law Hum Behav. 2002 Aug;26(4):417-38. doi: 10.1023/a:1016331221797.
10
Prison sentencing increases the risk of unemployment among illegal heroin users in Taiwan.台湾地区监狱判刑增加非法海洛因使用者失业风险。
Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2020 Oct 12;15(1):77. doi: 10.1186/s13011-020-00320-3.

引用本文的文献

1
Post-incarceration outcomes of a comprehensive statewide correctional MOUD program: a retrospective cohort study.一项全州范围综合性惩教药物维持治疗计划的监禁后结果:一项回顾性队列研究。
Lancet Reg Health Am. 2022 Dec 23;18:100419. doi: 10.1016/j.lana.2022.100419. eCollection 2023 Feb.
2
Correctional "Free Lunch"? Cost Neglect Increases Punishment in Prosecutors.惩教的“免费午餐”?成本忽视增加检察官的量刑
Front Psychol. 2021 Nov 12;12:778293. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.778293. eCollection 2021.