Purpose This paper aims to examine whether being shown a testimony alleging that the perpetrator of a crime was influenced by an accomplice has an impact on the severity of the sentence given to this accomplice. Design/methodology/approach A total of 119 participants read the summary of a case of armed robbery. Two experimental conditions were adopted: the presence of a testimony suggesting the accomplice’s influence on the perpetrator in committing the crime (versus no testimony). The participants were then asked what sentence they would give the accomplice and what sentence they would have given the perpetrator of the crime, who had in fact already been sentenced. The participants rated items relating to the explanation for the crime (perception that the perpetrator had been manipulated by the presumed accomplice) and to the presumed accomplice’s intent to commit the crime. Findings The participants showed themselves to be harsher towards the presumed accomplice when they were shown the testimony about his influence, which reduced the disparity with the sentence they would have given to the perpetrator of the crime. Analyses of mediation show that the participants shown the testimony (as opposed to those who were not) were more likely to say that the presumed accomplice manipulated the perpetrator of the crime, leading them to be more likely to attribute to the accomplice the intent to commit the crime and to be harsher towards him. Originality/value The results of this research are discussed with a focus on naïve interpretations of influence in the very specific context of legal adjudication.
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to offer a discussion on the socio-cognitive biases involved during a criminal trial, in accordance with the literature in this field. Design/methodology/approach Whether it is the biases of representation, availability or anchoring (Fariña et al., 2003), they have been widely studied in social psychology and constitute a relevant angle of analysis in the judicial context. Findings This paper outlines the issues related to the reality of the judicial decision, the psychological dilemmas that arise from it, as well as the normative pressures underlying the need to rationalize the decision. Finally, the status of psycho-legal expertise and the importance given to it is also discussed with regard to these issues. Practical implications This paper may help provide the diverse socio-judicial actors with some elements for questioning the psychological mechanisms that may intervene in the decision-making and therefore create a sense of conscientization necessary to optimize the quality of decision-making. Originality/value This paper may help provide the diverse socio-judicial actors with some elements for questioning the psychological mechanisms that may intervene in the decision-making and therefore create a sense of conscientization necessary to optimize the quality of decision-making.
No abstract
Cet article vise à présenter les résultats d’une recherche qualitative conduite auprès de 10 jeunes placés sous la Loi sur le système de justice pénale pour les adolescents (LSJPA) au Québec. L’approche de la justice interactionnelle a permis d’explorer comment ces jeunes perçoivent leurs interactions avec les juges durant les audiences ainsi que les implications de ces interactions dans leur engagement dans leur propre processus de rétablissement. Les résultats mettent en évidence l’importance de la préparation de ces jeunes à l’audience, de la conciliation du juge dans le processus décisionnel ainsi que de la création d’un espace d’échanges avec ces jeunes comme levier de leur participation. La création d’une alliance relationnelle avec ces jeunes favorise une continuité et une stabilité de jugement, conditions essentielles pour instaurer une relation de confiance avec ces jeunes et leur permettre de s’engager dans leur propre processus de (ré)intégration sociocommunautaire. Enfin, cette recherche invite à poursuivre les réflexions autour de la perception du sentiment de justice des jeunes en contexte judiciaire et à étayer davantage les recherches conduites à ce sujet dans le champ de justice juvénile.
Purpose This paper is the result of a collaboration and sharing of experiences of two postdoctoral researchers. The purpose of this paper is to put these experiences into perspective by cross-referencing our respective personal narratives with an analysis of the existing literature on the postdoctoral experience in the social sciences. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted a non-exhaustive systematic literature review using the database PsycInfo and the multidisciplinary Web of Science Catalogue database to find relevant articles published from 2000 to today. Of the 946 articles identified from the database, only 12 were included in the literature review. The authors also included four articles identified from other sources, such as Google Scholar. Secondly, the authors used a method inspired by reflexive personal narrative writing, which allowed us to share our postdoctoral experience and examine how it compares or complements the existing literature on postdoctoral experience in the social sciences. Findings The literature highlights three significant criteria that play a major role in the postdoctoral experience across disciplines: professional identity, work–life balance and relationship with supervisor. While the majority of the current literature seems to highlight the importance of career prospects in the daily lives of postdoctoral researchers, the other two aspects seem to be somewhat less explored. However, personal factors as well as the relationship with the supervisor appear to be of major importance in the search for work–life balance, feelings of competency and overall satisfaction among postdoctoral researchers. Research limitations/implications At the theoretical level, this paper allows a better understanding of the experiences of postdoctoral students in the social sciences, which seem to be less documented than those in scientific fields (e.g., Science, technology, engineering and mathematics postdoctoral fellow). Practical implications On a practical level, it constitutes a tool for reflection for postdoctoral researchers in the social sciences as well as for academic actors working to support and develop the well-being of these researchers (e.g. teachers, supervisors, administrators), all with the aim of optimising academic practices. Originality/value These results are discussed with respect to the specificity that our subjective personal narratives can offer to understand postdoctoral experiences, particularly in the social sciences, and thus offer reflections on ways to attend to individual psychosocial and relational needs that can foster an improved personal and professional training.
Objective. The objective of this research was to describe and analyze the role of psychological and behavioral factors on perceptions of COVID-19 in France and Quebec at three different times during the pandemic. Design. We conducted three qualitative and quantitative studies (Study 1 N = 255, Study 2 N = 230, Study 3 N = 143). Participants were asked to evaluate psychological and behavioral measures: at the beginning of lockdown (Study 1), during lockdown (Study 2), and during lockdown exit (Study 3). Results. Results of Study 1 show that perceptions of COVID-19 are organized around fear and a sense of threat. During the lockdown, participants mentioned for the first time the health practices to prevent the spread of COVID-19 (Study 2). Psychological and social impacts constitute a central theme in participants’ discourse (Study 2 and 3). Conclusions. The results show that perceptions of risk during a pandemic are socially constructed. Perceptions seem to be influenced by the political and health management of a territory and by the evolution of behavioral and psychological responses.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.