Integrating subjectively-derived choice sets to expand offender decision-making

IF 1.4 4区 社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Matthew C. Kijowski, Theodore Wilson
{"title":"Integrating subjectively-derived choice sets to expand offender decision-making","authors":"Matthew C. Kijowski, Theodore Wilson","doi":"10.1080/0735648X.2022.2062035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Rational choice and offender decision-making are premised upon each individual’s weighing of their subjectively perceived behavioral options. However, most applications have failed to account for the heterogeneity in the options individuals perceive to have available to them within their choice set. We leveraged interdisciplinary scholarship from the fields of neuroscience and psychology to develop a strategy to capture the choice set of perceived options. Using a community sample of adults randomly assigned to one of two vignettes, we asked respondents to list the options they perceived to have available to resolve the given vignette. We then classified those options into one of four categories: pure conformist, abstain, pure criminal, or hybrid wherein an option was simultaneously criminal and prosocial. We found extensive heterogeneity in both the options and choice sets arising from each vignette. Most individuals did not note any criminal options while hybrid options appeared to a non-trivial degree in only one of the two vignettes. Our findings highlight the pitfalls associated with providing respondents with options as compared to having them subjectively construct their own options, while also pointing to how choice sets can provide a more descriptively accurate assessment of decision-making processes.","PeriodicalId":46770,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Crime & Justice","volume":"46 1","pages":"24 - 43"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Crime & Justice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2022.2062035","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Rational choice and offender decision-making are premised upon each individual’s weighing of their subjectively perceived behavioral options. However, most applications have failed to account for the heterogeneity in the options individuals perceive to have available to them within their choice set. We leveraged interdisciplinary scholarship from the fields of neuroscience and psychology to develop a strategy to capture the choice set of perceived options. Using a community sample of adults randomly assigned to one of two vignettes, we asked respondents to list the options they perceived to have available to resolve the given vignette. We then classified those options into one of four categories: pure conformist, abstain, pure criminal, or hybrid wherein an option was simultaneously criminal and prosocial. We found extensive heterogeneity in both the options and choice sets arising from each vignette. Most individuals did not note any criminal options while hybrid options appeared to a non-trivial degree in only one of the two vignettes. Our findings highlight the pitfalls associated with providing respondents with options as compared to having them subjectively construct their own options, while also pointing to how choice sets can provide a more descriptively accurate assessment of decision-making processes.
整合主观衍生选择集,扩展罪犯决策
理性选择和罪犯决策的前提是每个人对其主观感知的行为选择的权衡。然而,大多数应用程序都没有考虑到个人在其选择集中认为可用的选项的异质性。我们利用神经科学和心理学领域的跨学科学术,制定了一种策略来捕捉感知选项的选择集。使用随机分配到两个小插曲之一的成年人社区样本,我们要求受访者列出他们认为可以解决给定小插曲的选项。然后,我们将这些选项分为四类:纯粹顺从者、弃权者、纯粹罪犯或混合型,其中一种选项同时是罪犯和亲社会的。我们发现,每个小插曲产生的选项和选择集都存在广泛的异质性。大多数人没有注意到任何犯罪选择,而混合选择在两个小插曲中只有一个出现在非琐碎的程度上。我们的研究结果强调了与让受访者主观构建自己的选项相比,向他们提供选项的陷阱,同时也指出了选择集如何对决策过程提供更具描述性的准确评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Crime & Justice
Journal of Crime & Justice CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信