对犯罪严重程度的无罪判决偏差效应的重新审视。
A re-examination of the acquittal biasing effect of offence seriousness.
作者信息
Lundrigan Samantha, Dhami Mandeep K, Mueller-Johnson Katrin
机构信息
Policing Institute for the Eastern Region, Faculty of Arts, Law and Social Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford, UK.
Department of Psychology, Middlesex University, London, UK.
出版信息
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2018 Jun 19;25(5):769-778. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2018.1478334. eCollection 2018.
The justice system should operate free of bias, and jurors' judgements of a defendant's guilt should be based on evidential factors alone. However, research suggests that this is not always the case. The aim of this study is to investigate the biasing effect of offence seriousness - a case-related, extralegal factor - on juror decision-making. An experiment was conducted to examine the effect of this extralegal factor on 118 members of the jury-eligible public's interpretations of 'beyond reasonable doubt' (BRD), probability of commission, verdict and confidence in verdict. It was found that defendants charged with more serious offences were judged to be less likely to have committed the crime. However, offence seriousness was not found to have a significant effect on interpretations of BRD and verdict. The present findings suggest a need to instruct jurors on the application of legal (probative) factors alone.
司法系统应公正无偏地运作，陪审员对被告有罪与否的判断应仅基于证据因素。然而，研究表明情况并非总是如此。本研究的目的是调查罪行严重程度（一个与案件相关的法外因素）对陪审员决策的偏见影响。进行了一项实验，以检验这一 法外因素对118名符合陪审员资格的公众对“排除合理怀疑”（BRD）的理解、犯罪可能性、裁决以及对裁决的信心的影响。研究发现，被指控犯更严重罪行的被告被判定犯罪的可能性较小。然而，未发现罪行严重程度对BRD的理解和裁决有显著影响。目前的研究结果表明，有必要仅就法律（证据）因素的应用对陪审员进行指导。
Zotero 插件