Putting the "social" back in legal socialization: procedural justice, legitimacy, and cynicism in legal and nonlegal authorities.
Putting the "social" back in legal socialization: procedural justice, legitimacy, and cynicism in legal and nonlegal authorities.
复制标题
将“社会”放回法律社会化：程序正义、合法性以及法律和非法律权威的犬儒主义。
作者：
Rick Trinkner;E. Cohn
传统上，法律的社会化理论和研究一直被认知发展的方法所主导。然而，最近的工作（例如，Fagan &泰勒（2005）用程序正义来解释法律的社会化过程。本文提出了两项研究，通过测试法律的社会化的程序正义模型，在法律的和非法律的权威方面扩展了这一方法。在研究1中，参与者完成了调查，评估他们认为3个当局（警察，家长和教师）在程序上公平的程度，他们认为当局合法的程度，他们对法律的愤世嫉俗程度，以及他们在过去6个月内违反规则的程度。在这三种权威中，合法性和法律的犬儒主义在程序正义与规则违反之间起中介作用。研究2采用实验方法对具有相同3种权威类型的模型进行了检验。参与者阅读了3个描述青少年和权威人物之间的互动的场景，其中规则是强制执行的。在每一种情况下，我们都操纵青少年是否有发言权，以及当局是否公正地执行规则。在阅读每一个场景之后，参与者对权威的合法性、他们对权威规则的愤世嫉俗以及他们违反规则的可能性进行评级。同样，合法性和规则犬儒主义调解了公正性、声音和违反规则之间的关系。此外，公正性有更强的影响，在家长和教师的情况下，而声音有更强的影响，在警察的情况下。结果进行了讨论，扩大法律的社会化的非法律的背景和应用法律的社会化研究的预防和干预策略。
Traditionally, legal socialization theory and research has been dominated by a cognitive developmental approach. However, more recent work (e.g., Fagan & Tyler, 2005) has used procedural justice to explain the legal socialization process. This article presents 2 studies that expand this approach by testing a procedural justice model of legal socialization in terms of legal and nonlegal authority. In Study 1, participants completed surveys assessing the degree to which they perceived 3 authorities (police officers, parents, and teachers) as procedurally fair, the degree to which they perceived the authorities as legitimate, how cynical they were about laws, and the extent of their rule violation during the past 6 months. Across all 3 authorities, legitimacy and legal cynicism mediated the relation between procedural justice and rule violation. Study 2 examined the model with the same 3 authority types using experimental methods. Participants read 3 scenarios describing an interaction between an adolescent and an authority figure where a rule is enforced. Within each scenario, we manipulated whether the adolescent had a voice and whether the authority enforced the rule impartially. After reading each scenario, participants rated the authority's legitimacy, their cynicism toward the authority's rule, and the likelihood they would violate the rule. Again, legitimacy and rule cynicism mediated the relation between impartiality, voice, and rule violation. In addition, impartiality had a stronger effect in the parent and teacher scenarios, whereas voice had a stronger effect in the police scenario. Results are discussed in terms of expanding legal socialization to nonlegal contexts and applying legal socialization research to prevention and intervention strategies.
青少年重犯法律社会化的发展轨迹。
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2005
期刊：
The Journal of criminal law & criminology
影响因子：
--
作者：
Piquero,AlexR;Fagan,Jeffrey;Mulvey,EdwardP;Steinberg,Laurence;Odgers,Candice
通讯作者：
Odgers,Candice
青少年重罪犯的理性选择和发展影响再犯。
影响因子：
1.7
作者：
Fagan,Jeffrey;Piquero,AlexR
通讯作者：
Piquero,AlexR