Integrating Remorse and Apology into Criminal Procedure

Bibas, Stephanos; Bierschbach, Richard A.

doi:10.2307/4135717

Cited by 101 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other recent studies also show a significant inverse relation between recidivism and moral cognition as well as between recidivism and the experience of moral emotions (with the former effect being larger than the latter) (Van Vugt et al, 2011). It also appears that expressing remorse in conjunction with an apology can help bring about forgiveness and closure for the victim and/or their family and friends (Bibas & Bierschbach, 2004;Orleans & Gurtman, 1984).…”

Section: Guilt In Law and Punishmentmentioning

confidence: 92%

Guilt by association?

Deem

Ramsey

2016

Philosophical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent evolutionary perspectives on guilt tend to focus on how guilt functions as a means for the individual to self-regulate behavior and as a mechanism for reinforcing cooperative tendencies.While these accounts highlight important dimensions of guilt and provide important insights into its evolutionary emergence, they pay scant attention to the large empirical literature on its maladaptive effects on individuals. This paper considers the nature of guilt, explores its biological function, and provides an evolutionary perspective on whether it is an individual-level or group selected trait. After surveying philosophical and psychological analyses of guilt, we consider which psychological mechanisms underlie the capacity to experience and act from guilt and whether they point to an emergence of guilt in early humans or to guilt having a longer phylogenetic history. Because guilt is a distinctively social emotion, we then examine its contemporary role in social and legal contexts, which may provide clues to its original biological function. Finally, we provide the outlines of two evolutionary explanations for guilt. We argue that group selection may have promoted the capacity to experience guilt, but that under certain conditions there may have been a positive individual selection force as well.

show abstract

Section: Guilt In Law and Punishmentmentioning

confidence: 92%

Guilt by association?

Deem

Ramsey

2016

Philosophical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…"Many commentators view a face-to-face interaction between offender and offended as essential to effective expressions of remorse and apology." 211 These interactions serve to enhance understanding between the two parties and to promote genuine reconciliation. 212 These interactions are particularly important for groups that otherwise have little opportunity to interact under normal circumstances.…”

Section: Reconciliation Under the Shadow Of The Lawmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bias and Religious Truth-Seeking in Proselytization Restrictions: An Atypical Case Study of Singapore

Chen

2013

Asian Journal of Comparative Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proselytisation restrictions are typically subjected to two objections. First, these restrictions curtail religious liberty and impede religious truth-seeking. Second, these restrictions tend to favour politically dominant religions and discriminate against minority religions. The restrictions on offensive religious propagation in Singapore thus present an interesting departure in which sanctioned religions are not politically marginalised religions, whereas protected religions include numerical minority religions that are socially, economically, and politically disadvantaged. This article utilises the atypical case study of Singapore to highlight the limitations of the two typical objections toward proselytisation restrictions. In particular, the emphasis on religious truth-seeking underpinning these objections is premised upon a distinct set of religious worldviews not shared by the majority of religions in Singapore. This article posits that if religious truthseeking is no longer the accepted normative goal, then there may be circumstances in which some limited and even-handed restrictions on offensive religious propagation are sufficiently justified on the grounds of social peace and harmony.

show abstract

“…Assuming such would be a teleological error: placing the source of control for the present in events that are yet to occur. Yet, this is so widely believed that remorse and other emotional descriptions of apologetic responses are commonly discussed variables in legal matters and their effects on mitigation or the reduction of a criminal's sentence (see Bagaric & Amarasekara, 2001;Bibas & Bierschbach, 2004;Tudor, 2008;Ward, 2006;Zhong et al, 2014). To our knowledge, there is no empirical evidence to support the assumption that the occurrence of apologies, particularly those that are composed of emotional responses, generally indicates a reduction in the future probability of aversive behaviors.…”

Section: The Source Of Control Of Apologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Behavioral Analysis of Apologies, Forgiveness, and Interpersonal Conflict

Toney

Hayes

2017

Behav. Soc. Iss.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Episodes of conflict can be among the most distressful experiences while interacting with others or within a relationship. There are a number of behaviors that occur to compose a conflict, however there are two behaviors that serve to restore a relationship following a conflict, those of apologizing and forgiving. While substantial attention has been provided to the issues of interpersonal conflict, apologizing, and forgiving from more traditional approaches, these accounts contrast with the views of behavior analysis in a number of ways. When the behaviors involved in interpersonal conflict are assessed from a behavioranalytic perspective, many of these traditional views are directly challenged. Furthermore, we find that the manner in which conflicts are normally resolved within relationships may be contributing to harmful patterns of interacting. The present paper aims to provide a thorough behavioral analysis of the operating contingencies and behaviors that occur during episodes of interpersonal conflict. With such an understanding, suggestions are made based on behavioral principles and procedures as to how resolution may be more readily achieved and further conflict may be avoided. KEYWORDS: conflict, apology, forgiveness, relationships, behavior analysis Relationships of every kind can be complicated and at times difficult for the individuals involved. While the majority of interactions within a relationship ideally are positive, it is almost unavoidable to experience a conflict of some sort. Individuals disagree, argue, insult, or cause pain to the other, all of which are likely distressing to those involved. These interactions can result in an array of unpleasant circumstances, such as avoidance, retaliation, or even the termination of a relationship. However, the behaviors of apologizing and forgiving serve to restore the relationship following a conflict; therefore, an examination seems warranted.The behaviors of apologizing and forgiving have become common features of our repertoires. The types of situations in which we engage in one or the other can vary greatly, such as when we abruptly walk in front of an individual at a grocery store to more substantial offenses as when a leader apologizes to a nation for wrongful action in war. These behaviors also occur across various types of relationships; a parent demands her child apologize to a sibling, and a partner proclaims to a spouse, "I deserve an apology." Being such common behaviors, apologizing and forgiving have received a great deal of attention from traditional fields. However, these accounts pose an array of differences when compared to those of behavior analysis. These differences, in general, pertain to the treatments of emotion, the emphasis on the form rather than the function of the responses involved, and the treatment of one independent individual's behavior.

show abstract

Integrating Remorse and Apology into Criminal Procedure

Cited by 101 publications

References 1 publication

Guilt by association?

Guilt by association?

Bias and Religious Truth-Seeking in Proselytization Restrictions: An Atypical Case Study of Singapore

A Behavioral Analysis of Apologies, Forgiveness, and Interpersonal Conflict

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About