Suppr超能文献

从谁的角度来看?在确定认罪的自愿性方面,行为人和观察者之间的差异。

From whose perspective? Differences between actors and observers in determining the voluntariness of guilty pleas.

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Graduate Center, City University of New York.

出版信息

Law Hum Behav. 2022 Oct;46(5):353-371. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000501.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Valid guilty pleas must be made voluntarily, yet most defendants report that they did not feel part of the decision-making process or responsible for the decision. Defendants and judges both play a role in determining whether guilty pleas are voluntary. The actor-observer bias suggests that defendants and judges perceive the decision-making process differently given the nature of their roles. The present studies applied this framework to assess the complexity of voluntary plea decision-making.

HYPOTHESES

We expected observers would rate pleas as more voluntary than would actors. We also expected participants to rate pleas made by guilty defendants as more voluntary than those made by innocent defendants and to view pleas made with voice as more voluntary than those made without voice. Finally, we expected the effect of guilt and voice on voluntariness to differ for actors and observers.

METHOD

Participants were Amazon's Mechanical Turk workers (Study 1: N = 202, Study 2: N = 626) who had a history of high-quality performance on past tasks, were roughly evenly split between men (Study 1: 52%, Study 2: 53%) and women (Study 1: 48%, Study 2: 47%), and were primarily White/non-Hispanic (Study 1: 84%, Study 2: 75%). They watched video-recorded materials about a criminal case in which a defendant decided how to plead. The materials varied the participant's role (actor, observer), the defendant's guilt (innocent, guilty), and whether the defendant had a voice in the decision-making process (no voice, voice). Participants then rated the voluntariness of the decision-making process.

RESULTS

In both studies, actors rated pleas as more voluntary than did observers. Participants rated guilty pleas as more voluntary when the defendant was guilty compared with innocent. Participants also rated pleas as more voluntary when the defendant had a voice in the decision-making process compared with when the defendant did not have a voice, but the difference was bigger for observers than for actors.

CONCLUSIONS

Defendants and judges both determine whether a guilty plea is made voluntarily. These decision-makers are likely to perceive the plea decision-making process differently given their differing perspectives. There was also a large effect of voice on whether decisions were perceived to be voluntary. Individuals who play a role in the plea decision-making process should ensure that defendants have a proper opportunity to express their opinions and preferences about the decision. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

摘要

目的

有效的认罪答辩必须是自愿作出的,但大多数被告报告说,他们没有参与决策过程或对该决定负责。被告和法官在确定认罪答辩是否自愿方面都发挥了作用。行为者-观察者偏见表明,鉴于其角色的性质,被告和法官对决策过程的看法不同。本研究应用这一框架来评估自愿认罪决定的复杂性。

假设

我们预计观察者会比行为者更倾向于将答辩视为自愿。我们还预计,参与者会将有罪被告的认罪视为比无罪被告的认罪更自愿,并认为有发言权的认罪比没有发言权的认罪更自愿。最后,我们预计,对于行为者和观察者来说,罪责和发言权对自愿性的影响是不同的。

方法

参与者是亚马逊 Mechanical Turk 的工人(研究 1:N = 202,研究 2:N = 626),他们在过去的任务中有很高的高质量表现记录,男女比例大致相等(研究 1:52%,研究 2:53%),主要是白人/非西班牙裔(研究 1:84%,研究 2:75%)。他们观看了一段关于一个被告决定如何答辩的刑事案件的视频记录材料。这些材料改变了参与者的角色(行为者、观察者)、被告的罪责(无辜、有罪),以及被告在决策过程中是否有发言权(无发言权、有发言权)。参与者随后对决策过程的自愿性进行了评分。

结果

在两项研究中,行为者对答辩的评价都比观察者更自愿。当被告有罪时,与无罪相比,参与者认为认罪更自愿。当被告在决策过程中有发言权时,与没有发言权时相比,参与者也认为答辩更自愿,但对观察者的影响比对行为者的影响更大。

结论

被告和法官都决定认罪是否是自愿作出的。鉴于他们不同的观点,这些决策者很可能对认罪答辩的决策过程有不同的看法。有声音对决定是否被视为自愿也有很大的影响。在认罪决策过程中扮演角色的个人应该确保被告有适当的机会表达他们对决定的意见和偏好。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2022 APA,保留所有权利)。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验