A Cross-Cultural Study of Punishment Beliefs and Decisions

被引:7
作者
Zhang, Yanyan [1 ]
Chen, Chuansheng [2 ]
Greenberger, Ellen [2 ]
Knowles, Eric D. [3 ]
机构
[1] Jilin Univ, Sch Philosophy & Sociol, Dept Psychol, Changchun, Peoples R China
[2] Univ Calif Irvine, Dept Psychol & Social Behav, Irvine, CA USA
[3] New York Univ, Dept Psychol, New York, NY USA
关键词
Crime punishment; cross-cultural; retribution; deterrence; functions of punishment; SELF-CONSTRUALS; DETERRENCE; REHABILITATION; JUSTIFICATIONS; STUDENTS; JUSTICE; CHINESE;
D O I
10.1177/0033294116679654
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
The current research examined cultural similarities and differences in punishment beliefs and decisions. Participants were European Americans (N=50), Chinese Americans (N=57), and Chinese in Mainland China (N=50). The Functions of Punishment Questionnaire was used to measure participants' beliefs about the retributive or deterrent functions of punishment and a scenario method was used to measure the extent to which punishment decisions were driven by individuals' concerns for retribution or deterrence. The results indicated that, contrary to the hypothesis that the retributive function would be emphasized by individualistic groups and the deterrent function by collectivistic groups, Mainland Chinese participants had a stronger belief in retribution and a weaker belief in deterrence than did European and Chinese Americans. The results also indicated that retribution played a bigger role in punishment decisions for Chinese than for the other two groups, but the importance of the deterrence function in punishment decisions did not differ across the three groups. Finally, the correlation between interdependence orientation and the belief in retribution was positive for Chinese but negative for European Americans. Taken together, the findings provided little evidence that collectivists are more deterrence-oriented and individualists more retribution-oriented.
引用
收藏
页码:5 / 24
页数:20
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1974, ESSAYS EC CRIME PUNI
[2]   PERCEPTIONS OF CHILDRENS CREDIBILITY IN SEXUAL ASSAULT CASES [J].
BOTTOMS, BL ;
GOODMAN, GS .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1994, 24 (08) :702-732
[3]  
Butcher J.N., 2015, USING MMPI 2 FORENSI, P69, DOI DOI 10.1037/14571-005
[4]   On justifying punishment: The discrepancy between words and actions [J].
Carlsmith, Kevin M. .
SOCIAL JUSTICE RESEARCH, 2008, 21 (02) :119-137
[5]   The roles of retribution and utility in determining punishment [J].
Carlsmith, KM .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2006, 42 (04) :437-451
[6]   Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment [J].
Carlsmith, KM ;
Darley, JM ;
Robinson, PH .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2002, 83 (02) :284-299
[7]   IS REHABILITATION DEAD - THE MYTH OF THE PUNITIVE PUBLIC [J].
CULLEN, FT ;
CULLEN, JB ;
WOZNIAK, JF .
JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, 1988, 16 (04) :303-317
[8]   The psychology of compensatory and retributive justice [J].
Darley, JM ;
Pittman, TS .
PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 2003, 7 (04) :324-336
[10]   Crime and punishment in the "American dream" [J].
Di Tella, Rafael ;
Dubra, Juan .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 2008, 92 (07) :1564-1584