过度惩戒行为与惩戒合理化政策的效果分析:警务人员惩戒申诉审查结果的实证分析

Jisuk Jeong, Jaeseong Jang
{"title":"过度惩戒行为与惩戒合理化政策的效果分析:警务人员惩戒申诉审查结果的实证分析","authors":"Jisuk Jeong, Jaeseong Jang","doi":"10.1080/10439463.2023.2214337","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\n In this paper, we conduct an empirical analysis to examine whether police officers are disciplined more severely than other government officers. We used data on disciplinary actions in cases of bribery, which had been extracted from the casebook on disciplinary appeals reviews (2004–2018) published by the Appeals Commission of the Republic of Korea. The results of the ordinal logistic regression for the entire period (2004–2018) show that disciplinary actions imposed by the police agency were more severe than other government agencies. However, in a period-separated analysis of police disciplinary rationalisation policies in 2011, the differences in the level of disciplinary actions between the police and other agencies were only significant in the former period (2004–2011). The difference was not significant in the latter (2012–2018). This implies that the police agency imposed more severe disciplinary actions than other government agencies in the past. However, the latter period analysis implies that the disciplinary tendency of the police changed due to the effectiveness of the disciplinary rationalisation policy of the South Korean police agency.","PeriodicalId":243832,"journal":{"name":"Policing and Society","volume":" 16","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The analysis of excessive disciplinary action and the effect of disciplinary rationalization policy: an empirical analysis of the results of disciplinary appeals reviews for police officers\",\"authors\":\"Jisuk Jeong, Jaeseong Jang\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10439463.2023.2214337\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT\\n In this paper, we conduct an empirical analysis to examine whether police officers are disciplined more severely than other government officers. We used data on disciplinary actions in cases of bribery, which had been extracted from the casebook on disciplinary appeals reviews (2004–2018) published by the Appeals Commission of the Republic of Korea. The results of the ordinal logistic regression for the entire period (2004–2018) show that disciplinary actions imposed by the police agency were more severe than other government agencies. However, in a period-separated analysis of police disciplinary rationalisation policies in 2011, the differences in the level of disciplinary actions between the police and other agencies were only significant in the former period (2004–2011). The difference was not significant in the latter (2012–2018). This implies that the police agency imposed more severe disciplinary actions than other government agencies in the past. However, the latter period analysis implies that the disciplinary tendency of the police changed due to the effectiveness of the disciplinary rationalisation policy of the South Korean police agency.\",\"PeriodicalId\":243832,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Policing and Society\",\"volume\":\" 16\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Policing and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2023.2214337\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policing and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2023.2214337","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文通过实证分析来检验警察是否比其他政府官员更严格地遵守纪律。我们使用了贿赂案件中的纪律处分数据,这些数据摘自大韩民国上诉委员会出版的《纪律申诉审查案例手册(2004-2018)》。整个时期(2004-2018年)的有序逻辑回归结果显示,警察机构的纪律处分比其他政府机构更严重。然而,在对2011年警察纪律合理化政策的阶段性分析中,警察和其他机构之间纪律行动水平的差异仅在前一个时期(2004-2011年)显著。后者(2012-2018年)差异不显著。这意味着,警察厅的惩戒力度比以往任何政府部门都要大。然而,后一时期的分析表明,由于韩国警察机构纪律合理化政策的有效性,警察的纪律倾向发生了变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The analysis of excessive disciplinary action and the effect of disciplinary rationalization policy: an empirical analysis of the results of disciplinary appeals reviews for police officers
ABSTRACT In this paper, we conduct an empirical analysis to examine whether police officers are disciplined more severely than other government officers. We used data on disciplinary actions in cases of bribery, which had been extracted from the casebook on disciplinary appeals reviews (2004–2018) published by the Appeals Commission of the Republic of Korea. The results of the ordinal logistic regression for the entire period (2004–2018) show that disciplinary actions imposed by the police agency were more severe than other government agencies. However, in a period-separated analysis of police disciplinary rationalisation policies in 2011, the differences in the level of disciplinary actions between the police and other agencies were only significant in the former period (2004–2011). The difference was not significant in the latter (2012–2018). This implies that the police agency imposed more severe disciplinary actions than other government agencies in the past. However, the latter period analysis implies that the disciplinary tendency of the police changed due to the effectiveness of the disciplinary rationalisation policy of the South Korean police agency.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信