与虚假认罪有关的赔偿和重返社会偏见的亲身经历。

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Mary Catlin,Talley Bettens,Allison D Redlich,Kyle C Scherr
{"title":"与虚假认罪有关的赔偿和重返社会偏见的亲身经历。","authors":"Mary Catlin,Talley Bettens,Allison D Redlich,Kyle C Scherr","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000588","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\r\nSome exonerees receive compensation and aid after being exonerated of their wrongful convictions, and some do not. Looking beyond differences in state statutes, we examined possible reasons for biases in receiving compensation (via statutes or civil claims) and other reintegration services. More specifically, we examined how two unique types of false admission of guilt (i.e., false confessions and false guilty pleas) could be associated with biased outcomes in compensation procurement and reintegration outcomes.\r\n\r\nHYPOTHESES\r\nAlthough we did not have formal hypotheses for this qualitative study, based on the cumulative disadvantage framework (Scherr, Redlich, & Kassin, 2020), we anticipated that both types of false admission of guilt would negatively bias exonerees' experience post-exoneration. More specifically, we expected that exonerees whose cases involved at least one type of false admission of guilt would have a more difficult time obtaining compensation and would experience more negative post-exoneration outcomes, compared with exonerees in general.\r\n\r\nMETHOD\r\nWe conducted in-depth interviews with three samples: (a) exonerees (n = 19), (b) attorneys who had assisted exonerees with post-exoneration compensation claims (n = 15), and (c) innocence advocates who had worked with exonerees (n = 9).\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nAcross all samples, interviewees indicated that both forms of false admission of guilt are associated with biases that may influence exonerees' compensation and reintegration efforts. Specifically, interviews revealed that (a) false admissions are associated with disadvantages to exonerees' compensation and reintegration efforts, as predicted by the cumulative disadvantage framework; (b) under specific circumstances, false admissions are associated with advantages benefiting compensation attempts; and (c) false admissions can be nonapplicable (i.e., irrelevant) to reintegration efforts.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nTogether, our findings provide a more nuanced understanding of the role false confessions and false guilty pleas may play post-exoneration. This understanding, derived from those individuals directly involved in the compensation and reintegration processes, is an important step in beginning to right the injustices experienced by those wrongfully convicted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lived experiences of bias in compensation and reintegration associated with false admissions of guilt.\",\"authors\":\"Mary Catlin,Talley Bettens,Allison D Redlich,Kyle C Scherr\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/lhb0000588\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"OBJECTIVE\\r\\nSome exonerees receive compensation and aid after being exonerated of their wrongful convictions, and some do not. Looking beyond differences in state statutes, we examined possible reasons for biases in receiving compensation (via statutes or civil claims) and other reintegration services. More specifically, we examined how two unique types of false admission of guilt (i.e., false confessions and false guilty pleas) could be associated with biased outcomes in compensation procurement and reintegration outcomes.\\r\\n\\r\\nHYPOTHESES\\r\\nAlthough we did not have formal hypotheses for this qualitative study, based on the cumulative disadvantage framework (Scherr, Redlich, & Kassin, 2020), we anticipated that both types of false admission of guilt would negatively bias exonerees' experience post-exoneration. More specifically, we expected that exonerees whose cases involved at least one type of false admission of guilt would have a more difficult time obtaining compensation and would experience more negative post-exoneration outcomes, compared with exonerees in general.\\r\\n\\r\\nMETHOD\\r\\nWe conducted in-depth interviews with three samples: (a) exonerees (n = 19), (b) attorneys who had assisted exonerees with post-exoneration compensation claims (n = 15), and (c) innocence advocates who had worked with exonerees (n = 9).\\r\\n\\r\\nRESULTS\\r\\nAcross all samples, interviewees indicated that both forms of false admission of guilt are associated with biases that may influence exonerees' compensation and reintegration efforts. Specifically, interviews revealed that (a) false admissions are associated with disadvantages to exonerees' compensation and reintegration efforts, as predicted by the cumulative disadvantage framework; (b) under specific circumstances, false admissions are associated with advantages benefiting compensation attempts; and (c) false admissions can be nonapplicable (i.e., irrelevant) to reintegration efforts.\\r\\n\\r\\nCONCLUSIONS\\r\\nTogether, our findings provide a more nuanced understanding of the role false confessions and false guilty pleas may play post-exoneration. This understanding, derived from those individuals directly involved in the compensation and reintegration processes, is an important step in beginning to right the injustices experienced by those wrongfully convicted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).\",\"PeriodicalId\":48230,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law and Human Behavior\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law and Human Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000588\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Human Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000588","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标一些被免除冤狱的人在被免除冤狱后获得了赔偿和援助,而一些人则没有。除了各州法规的差异之外,我们还研究了在获得赔偿(通过法规或民事索赔)和其他重返社会服务方面存在偏差的可能原因。更具体地说,我们研究了两种独特的虚假认罪类型(即虚假供述和虚假认罪)如何与获得赔偿和重返社会的偏差结果相关联。假设虽然我们没有为这项定性研究提出正式的假设,但基于累积劣势框架(Scherr, Redlich, & Kassin, 2020),我们预计这两种虚假认罪类型都会对被免除刑罚者在免除刑罚后的经历产生负面影响。更具体地说,我们预计,与一般被免除刑罚者相比,其案件至少涉及一种虚假认罪类型的被免除刑罚者将更难获得赔偿,并在被免除刑罚后经历更多负面结果:(结果在所有样本中,受访者都表示,两种形式的假认罪都与可能影响被免除刑罚者的赔偿和重新融入社会工作的偏见有关。具体而言,访谈显示:(a) 正如累积劣势框架所预测的那样,虚假认罪与被免除刑罚者的赔偿和重返社会努力的劣势相关;(b) 在特定情况下,虚假认罪与有利于赔偿努力的优势相关;(c) 虚假认罪可能与重返社会努力无关(即不适用)。这种理解来自那些直接参与赔偿和重返社会过程的人,是开始纠正那些被错误定罪的人所经历的不公正的重要一步。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Lived experiences of bias in compensation and reintegration associated with false admissions of guilt.
OBJECTIVE Some exonerees receive compensation and aid after being exonerated of their wrongful convictions, and some do not. Looking beyond differences in state statutes, we examined possible reasons for biases in receiving compensation (via statutes or civil claims) and other reintegration services. More specifically, we examined how two unique types of false admission of guilt (i.e., false confessions and false guilty pleas) could be associated with biased outcomes in compensation procurement and reintegration outcomes. HYPOTHESES Although we did not have formal hypotheses for this qualitative study, based on the cumulative disadvantage framework (Scherr, Redlich, & Kassin, 2020), we anticipated that both types of false admission of guilt would negatively bias exonerees' experience post-exoneration. More specifically, we expected that exonerees whose cases involved at least one type of false admission of guilt would have a more difficult time obtaining compensation and would experience more negative post-exoneration outcomes, compared with exonerees in general. METHOD We conducted in-depth interviews with three samples: (a) exonerees (n = 19), (b) attorneys who had assisted exonerees with post-exoneration compensation claims (n = 15), and (c) innocence advocates who had worked with exonerees (n = 9). RESULTS Across all samples, interviewees indicated that both forms of false admission of guilt are associated with biases that may influence exonerees' compensation and reintegration efforts. Specifically, interviews revealed that (a) false admissions are associated with disadvantages to exonerees' compensation and reintegration efforts, as predicted by the cumulative disadvantage framework; (b) under specific circumstances, false admissions are associated with advantages benefiting compensation attempts; and (c) false admissions can be nonapplicable (i.e., irrelevant) to reintegration efforts. CONCLUSIONS Together, our findings provide a more nuanced understanding of the role false confessions and false guilty pleas may play post-exoneration. This understanding, derived from those individuals directly involved in the compensation and reintegration processes, is an important step in beginning to right the injustices experienced by those wrongfully convicted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
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
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
8.00%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Law and Human Behavior, the official journal of the American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association, is a multidisciplinary forum for the publication of articles and discussions of issues arising out of the relationships between human behavior and the law, our legal system, and the legal process. This journal publishes original research, reviews of past research, and theoretical studies from professionals in criminal justice, law, psychology, sociology, psychiatry, political science, education, communication, and other areas germane to the field.
×
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