• 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

陪审员对被诊断患有边缘型人格障碍的被告的决策。

Juror decision-making regarding a defendant diagnosed with borderline personality disorder.

作者信息

Baker James, Edwards Ian, Beazley Peter

机构信息

Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychological Therapies (CPPT), Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.

Norfolk and Suffolk Mental Health Trust, Norwich, UK.

出版信息

Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2021 Aug 17;29(4):516-534. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2021.1938273. eCollection 2022.

DOI:10.1080/13218719.2021.1938273
PMID:35903499
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9318233/
Abstract

Stigma is an established consequence of the Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) diagnosis. This diagnosis is subject to revision in the International Classification of Diseases-11th Revision (ICD-11). Using the legal issue of diminished responsibility, this study applied an experimental mock-jury methodology to explore the impact of diagnostic stigma of BPD on jury decision-making. Participants were allocated to one of two versions of a simplified fictitious homicide trial. The group whose defendant was described as having a 'severe personality disorder, borderline pattern' rated the defendant as more dangerous, and more in need of segregation and coercive treatment, than controls where the defendant was described as having a 'complex mental health problem'. Between-group differences in other measures, including the decision to agree a verdict of diminished responsibility, were not found. The ICD-11 'severe personality disorder, borderline pattern' diagnosis may adversely impact the attitudes of jurors considering the question of diminished responsibility.

摘要

污名化是边缘性人格障碍(BPD)诊断的既定后果。该诊断在《国际疾病分类第11次修订本》(ICD - 11)中有待修订。本研究利用减轻责任这一法律问题,采用模拟陪审团实验方法,探讨BPD诊断污名化对陪审团决策的影响。参与者被分配到一个简化的虚构杀人审判的两个版本之一。与被告被描述为患有“复杂心理健康问题”的对照组相比,被告被描述为患有“严重人格障碍,边缘型”的组认为被告更危险,更需要隔离和强制治疗。在包括判定减轻责任裁决的决定在内的其他指标上,未发现组间差异。ICD - 11的“严重人格障碍,边缘型”诊断可能会对考虑减轻责任问题的陪审员态度产生不利影响。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb9/9318233/4e4625e47177/TPPL_A_1938273_F0001_B.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb9/9318233/4e4625e47177/TPPL_A_1938273_F0001_B.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6bb9/9318233/4e4625e47177/TPPL_A_1938273_F0001_B.jpg

相似文献

1
Juror decision-making regarding a defendant diagnosed with borderline personality disorder.陪审员对被诊断患有边缘型人格障碍的被告的决策。
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2021 Aug 17;29(4):516-534. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2021.1938273. eCollection 2022.
2
Juror characteristics on trial: Investigating how psychopathic traits, rape attitudes, victimization experiences, and juror demographics influence decision-making in an intimate partner rape trial.受审的陪审员特征:探究精神病态特征、强奸态度、受害经历和陪审员人口统计学特征如何影响亲密伴侣强奸案审判中的决策。
Front Psychiatry. 2023 Jan 16;13:1086026. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.1086026. eCollection 2022.
3
Race, witness credibility, and jury deliberation in a simulated drug trafficking trial.种族、证人可信度与模拟毒品交易审判中的陪审团审议。
Law Hum Behav. 2021 Jun;45(3):215-228. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000449.
4
How type of excuse defense, mock juror age, and defendant age affect mock jurors' decisions.借口辩护类型、模拟陪审员年龄和被告年龄如何影响模拟陪审员的决策。
J Soc Psychol. 2007 Aug;147(4):371-92. doi: 10.3200/SOCP.147.4.371-392.
5
The influence of race on jurors' perceptions of lethal police use of force.种族对陪审员对警察致命武力使用的看法的影响。
Law Hum Behav. 2023 Feb;47(1):53-67. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000516.
6
Gender, Generations, and Guilt: Defendant Gender and Age Affect Jurors' Decisions and Perceptions in an Intimate Partner Homicide Trial.性别、代际与内疚感:亲密伴侣杀人案审判中被告的性别和年龄对陪审员决策及认知的影响
J Interpers Violence. 2023 Dec;38(23-24):12089-12112. doi: 10.1177/08862605231191227. Epub 2023 Aug 21.
7
Keep your bias to yourself: How deliberating with differently biased others affects mock-jurors' guilt decisions, perceptions of the defendant, memories, and evidence interpretation.保持偏见:与具有不同偏见的他人协商如何影响模拟陪审员的有罪判决、对被告的看法、记忆和证据解释。
Law Hum Behav. 2017 Oct;41(5):478-493. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000256. Epub 2017 Jul 17.
8
Jurors' cognitive depletion and performance during jury deliberation as a function of jury diversity and defendant race.陪审员在陪审团审议过程中的认知耗竭与表现取决于陪审团的多样性和被告的种族。
Law Hum Behav. 2019 Jun;43(3):232-249. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000332.
9
From the shadows into the light: How pretrial publicity and deliberation affect mock jurors' decisions, impressions, and memory.从阴影走向光明:审前宣传和审议如何影响模拟陪审员的决策、印象和记忆。
Law Hum Behav. 2015 Jun;39(3):294-310. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000117. Epub 2014 Dec 15.
10
Abuse Is Abuse: The Influence of Type of Abuse, Victim Age, and Defendant Age on Juror Decision Making.虐待就是虐待:虐待类型、受害者年龄和被告年龄对陪审员决策的影响。
J Interpers Violence. 2021 Jan;36(1-2):938-956. doi: 10.1177/0886260517731316. Epub 2017 Sep 14.

引用本文的文献

1
Practical implications of ICD-11 personality disorder classifications.ICD-11 人格障碍分类的实际影响。
BMC Psychiatry. 2024 Mar 7;24(1):191. doi: 10.1186/s12888-024-05640-3.

本文引用的文献

1
Borderline personality disorder, complex trauma, and problems with self and identity: A social-communicative approach.边缘型人格障碍、复杂创伤和自我与身份认同问题:一种社会交际方法。
J Pers. 2020 Feb;88(1):88-105. doi: 10.1111/jopy.12483. Epub 2019 May 23.
2
The Development of the ICD-11 Classification of Personality Disorders: An Amalgam of Science, Pragmatism, and Politics.《ICD-11 人格障碍分类的发展:科学、实用主义与政治的融合》
Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2019 May 7;15:481-502. doi: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050718-095736. Epub 2019 Jan 2.
3
Dangerous, depraved, and death-worthy: A meta-analysis of the correlates of perceived psychopathy in jury simulation studies.
危险、堕落、死刑 worthy:陪审团模拟研究中感知精神病态的相关性的荟萃分析。
J Clin Psychol. 2019 Apr;75(4):627-643. doi: 10.1002/jclp.22726. Epub 2018 Dec 18.
4
Application of the ICD-11 classification of personality disorders.人格障碍 ICD-11 分类的应用。
BMC Psychiatry. 2018 Oct 29;18(1):351. doi: 10.1186/s12888-018-1908-3.
5
Mental capacity and borderline personality disorder.心理能力与边缘型人格障碍
BJPsych Bull. 2017 Feb;41(1):33-36. doi: 10.1192/pb.bp.115.052753.
6
Personality disorder: still the patients psychiatrists dislike?人格障碍:仍然是精神科医生不喜欢的患者群体吗?
BJPsych Bull. 2017 Feb;41(1):12-17. doi: 10.1192/pb.bp.115.052456.
7
The association of posttraumatic stress disorder, complex posttraumatic stress disorder, and borderline personality disorder from a network analytical perspective.从网络分析的角度看创伤后应激障碍、复杂创伤后应激障碍和边缘型人格障碍的关联。
J Anxiety Disord. 2016 Oct;43:70-78. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2016.09.002. Epub 2016 Sep 9.
8
Juror decision making in not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder trials: Effects of defendant gender and mental illness type.因精神障碍而不负刑事责任审判中的陪审员决策:被告性别和精神疾病类型的影响。
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2016 Sep-Dec;49(Pt A):47-54. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2016.05.008. Epub 2016 May 27.
9
Impact of Psychiatric Information on Potential Jurors in Evaluating High-Functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder (hfASD).精神科信息对潜在陪审员评估高功能自闭症谱系障碍(hfASD)的影响。
J Ment Health Res Intellect Disabil. 2015 Jul 1;8(3-4):140-167. doi: 10.1080/19315864.2015.1040176. Epub 2015 May 28.
10
The Stigma of Personality Disorders.人格障碍的污名化
Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2016 Jan;18(1):11. doi: 10.1007/s11920-015-0654-1.