Clark Brendan C, Thorne Christopher B, Hendricks Peter S, Sharp Carla, Clark Shane K, Cropsey Karen L
Department of Psychiatry, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Department of Health Behavior, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Crim Behav Ment Health. 2015 Jul;25(3):169-80. doi: 10.1002/cbm.1920. Epub 2014 Jun 9.
The high rate of incarceration in the USA warrants continued exploration into understanding and ameliorating criminal behaviour. The growing use of cooperative games to measure developing prosocial behaviours has never been explored in a US criminal justice population.
The aim of this study is to examine cooperative game play among offenders under supervision in the community. We hypothesised that the offenders would use more guarded and self-preserving strategies and be more likely to excel in short-lived interactions than law-abiding community citizens.
Community supervised offenders (83) and general population comparison participants (41) were recruited by town centre adverts placed in popular shops. Using the supervision centres as venues, all participants were asked to complete four cooperative games (prisoner's dilemma, public goods game, ultimatum game and trust game), not knowing the identity of the other player who was always, in fact, the experimenter.
The offender and general population groups were similar in age (early 30s), sex (2/3 men), race (45% white) and IQ distribution (low average range). Offenders made lower offers in the ultimatum game, had lower scores in the prisoner's dilemma, made lower investments and offered lower returns in the trust game and contributed less in the public goods game.
Even community-based offenders thus seem to have deficits in the kinds of gameplay, which are informed by theories of social cooperation, but the direction of relationship with offending remains unclear. The apparent deficits may reflect adaptation to a hostile environment where trust and reciprocity are not rewarded. It is also important to recognise that these community-based offenders did develop play indicative of trust and reciprocity, they just did so more slowly than the comparison group. This may have implications for allowing time for rapport to develop in supervisory relationships. Finally, offenders may benefit from learning that although more guarded behaviours may be adaptive in a rough neighbourhood or in jail, they may be maladaptive and limit their success in other settings such as the work place.
美国的高监禁率使得有必要持续深入研究理解和改善犯罪行为。合作游戏在测量亲社会行为发展方面的应用日益广泛,但从未在美国刑事司法人群中进行过探索。
本研究旨在考察社区监管下罪犯的合作游戏行为。我们假设,与守法的社区居民相比,罪犯会更多地采用谨慎和自我保护策略,并且在短暂互动中更有可能表现出色。
通过在热门商店张贴市中心广告招募了83名社区监管罪犯和41名普通人群作为对照参与者。以监管中心为场地,所有参与者被要求完成四个合作游戏(囚徒困境、公共物品游戏、最后通牒游戏和信任游戏),且不知道其他玩家的身份,而实际上其他玩家始终是实验者。
罪犯组和普通人群组在年龄(30岁出头)、性别(三分之二为男性)、种族(45%为白人)和智商分布(低平均范围)方面相似。在最后通牒游戏中,罪犯给出的提议较低;在囚徒困境中得分较低;在信任游戏中投资较少、回报较低;在公共物品游戏中贡献较少。
因此,即使是社区罪犯在社会合作理论指导下的游戏行为方面似乎也存在缺陷,但与犯罪之间的关系方向仍不明确。这些明显的缺陷可能反映了对信任和互惠得不到回报的敌对环境的适应。同样重要的是要认识到,这些社区罪犯确实表现出了信任和互惠的游戏行为,只是比对照组发展得更慢。这可能对在监管关系中留出时间建立融洽关系有影响。最后,罪犯可能会从了解到以下情况中受益:尽管在恶劣社区或监狱中更谨慎的行为可能具有适应性,但在其他环境(如工作场所)中可能具有适应不良性并限制他们的成功。