The Impact of Ambiguity-induced Error in Offender Decision-making: Evidence from the Field
The Impact of Ambiguity-induced Error in Offender Decision-making: Evidence from the Field
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/00224278211000088
复制
发表时间：
2021-03-29
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
Tahamont, Sarah
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Midgette, Greg;Loughran, Thomas A.;Tahamont, Sarah
目的：在犯罪者决策的背景下引用行为经济学的模糊性理论，并检验惩罚确定性的模糊性对犯罪者决策的影响。方法：我们利用准实验条件对醉酒驾驶被捕者进行酒精使用测试，并因违规而被强制短暂监禁。治疗条件放宽了零容忍酒精规则，从而引入了基于设计的围绕惩罚确定性的模棱两可。我们使用马氏匹配和倾向分数加权方法来估计歧义对违规行为的影响。然后，我们用互补的敏感度分析来验证这一发现。结果：当面对模棱两可的条件时，参与者在监督30天后违反计划条件的可能性增加了27-28个百分点(84-93%)。我们证明，在监督90天和180天时，由于模棱两可而造成的违规行为的统计差异仍然可以检测到。这些结果对替代规范和证伪测试具有较强的稳健性。结论：本研究首次使用现场准实验考察了模糊对刑事司法程序遵从性的影响。我们进一步展示了在程序设计中适用于刑事司法领域的受监督人员的意外成本和松懈的管辖权。
Objectives:To invoke behavioral economics theories of ambiguity in the context of offender decision-making, and to test the impact of ambiguity in punishment certainty on offender decisions.Methods:We leverage a quasi-experimental condition among a sample of drunk driving arrestees that are tested for alcohol use and subject to mandatory brief incarceration for a violation. The treatment condition relaxes a zero-tolerance alcohol rule, thereby introducing design-based ambiguity surrounding the certainty of punishment. We use Mahalanobis matching and propensity score weighting methods to estimate the impact of ambiguity on violations. We then interrogate this finding with complementary sensitivity analyses.Results:When facing the ambiguity condition participants are 27-28 percentage points (84-93 percent) more likely to violate program conditions after 30 days of supervision. We demonstrate that a statistical difference in violations due to ambiguity is still detectible at 90 and 180 days of supervision. These results are robust to alternative specifications and falsification tests.Conclusions:This study is the first to examine the impact of ambiguity on criminal justice program compliance using a quasi-experiment from the field. We further demonstrate the unintended costs to persons under supervision and jurisdictions of laxity in program design, which are applicable across criminal justice domains.