Rationale of punishment in the citizen-judge system

DOI
  • TSUKAMOTO Saori
    Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Nagoya University:Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  • SUGA Sayaka
    Division of General Education, Aichi Gakuin University
  • KARASAWA Minoru
    Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Nagoya University

Bibliographic Information

Other Title
  • 裁判員裁判の量刑決定要因に関する第三者の推測(<サブ特集>裁判員制度の見直しに向けて:法と心理学の視点からII)
  • 裁判員裁判の量刑決定要因に関する第三者の推測
  • サイバンイン サイバン ノ リョウケイ ケッテイ ヨウイン ニ カンスル ダイサンシャ ノ スイソク

Search this article

Abstract

The present study investigated how the public perceives the citizen-judge system through causal explanations of a determined punishment. In the first study, participants were asked to think about the rationale for citizen judges to determine the appropriate punishment for a particular crime. They were instructed to write their reasons as free descriptions. Three general themes emerged: characteristics of the citizen judges, type of crime, and system procedures. The second study further revealed a psychological factor that directed respondents' attention to gender categories as explanations for the determined punishment. Psychological essentialism (i.e., belief in immutable and inherent categorical essence) was used as a psychological factor to distinguish respondents' degree of making categorical inferences. People who strongly (vs. weakly) endorsed psychological essentialism made more causal inferences for male gender categories, regardless of the types of crime. Through these studies, we have suggested a potential framework for examining the citizen-judge system from a public perspective.

Journal

Keywords

Details

Report a problem

Back to top