恢复性和报复性司法偏好及其与道德能力水平的关系

Q3 Psychology
M. Gutiérrez-Romero, Wilson López-López, L. Silva
{"title":"恢复性和报复性司法偏好及其与道德能力水平的关系","authors":"M. Gutiérrez-Romero, Wilson López-López, L. Silva","doi":"10.14349/SUMAPSI.2020.V27.N2.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, we aim to identify the relationship between the preference towards one of two types of justice (retributive justice and restorative justice) and the level of moral competence in university students. A convenience sample of 120 Psychology students (93 women and 27 men) aged 16-46 (M=19.53, SD=3.17) participated in this correlational design. The “Preference Scale Towards Restorative/Retributive Justice” was designed and validated and the “Moral Judgement Test” was applied. Results suggest that most students lean towards restorative justice and have low to medium levels of moral competence. We found a positive and statistically significant correlation between moral competence and preference for restorative and retributive justice for one of the analyzed dilemmas (doctor vs. worker). Results are discussed assuming that the type of transgressing event significantly affects moral competence index and favorability toward a specific type of justice. The preference tends toward restorative justice than retributive justice; this preference is not influenced by sex or having been the victim of a crime.","PeriodicalId":38992,"journal":{"name":"Suma Psicologica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preferencia hacia la justicia restaurativa y retributiva y su relación con el nivel de competencia moral\",\"authors\":\"M. Gutiérrez-Romero, Wilson López-López, L. Silva\",\"doi\":\"10.14349/SUMAPSI.2020.V27.N2.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this paper, we aim to identify the relationship between the preference towards one of two types of justice (retributive justice and restorative justice) and the level of moral competence in university students. A convenience sample of 120 Psychology students (93 women and 27 men) aged 16-46 (M=19.53, SD=3.17) participated in this correlational design. The “Preference Scale Towards Restorative/Retributive Justice” was designed and validated and the “Moral Judgement Test” was applied. Results suggest that most students lean towards restorative justice and have low to medium levels of moral competence. We found a positive and statistically significant correlation between moral competence and preference for restorative and retributive justice for one of the analyzed dilemmas (doctor vs. worker). Results are discussed assuming that the type of transgressing event significantly affects moral competence index and favorability toward a specific type of justice. The preference tends toward restorative justice than retributive justice; this preference is not influenced by sex or having been the victim of a crime.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38992,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Suma Psicologica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Suma Psicologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14349/SUMAPSI.2020.V27.N2.5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Psychology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Suma Psicologica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14349/SUMAPSI.2020.V27.N2.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在本文中,我们旨在确定大学生对两种类型的司法(报复性司法和恢复性司法)之一的偏好与道德能力水平之间的关系。120名年龄在16-46岁(M=19.53,SD=3.17)的心理学学生(93名女性和27名男性)参与了这一相关设计。设计并验证了“恢复性/惩罚性司法偏好量表”,并应用了“道德判断测试”。研究结果表明,大多数学生倾向于恢复性司法,道德能力水平较低至中等。我们发现,在所分析的困境之一(医生与工人)中,道德能力与对恢复性和报复性司法的偏好之间存在正相关,且具有统计学意义。假设违法事件的类型显著影响道德能力指数和对特定类型正义的好感度,讨论了结果。倾向于恢复性司法而非报复性司法;这种偏好不受性别或曾经是犯罪受害者的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Preferencia hacia la justicia restaurativa y retributiva y su relación con el nivel de competencia moral
In this paper, we aim to identify the relationship between the preference towards one of two types of justice (retributive justice and restorative justice) and the level of moral competence in university students. A convenience sample of 120 Psychology students (93 women and 27 men) aged 16-46 (M=19.53, SD=3.17) participated in this correlational design. The “Preference Scale Towards Restorative/Retributive Justice” was designed and validated and the “Moral Judgement Test” was applied. Results suggest that most students lean towards restorative justice and have low to medium levels of moral competence. We found a positive and statistically significant correlation between moral competence and preference for restorative and retributive justice for one of the analyzed dilemmas (doctor vs. worker). Results are discussed assuming that the type of transgressing event significantly affects moral competence index and favorability toward a specific type of justice. The preference tends toward restorative justice than retributive justice; this preference is not influenced by sex or having been the victim of a crime.
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
Suma Psicologica
Suma Psicologica Psychology-Psychology (all)
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
×
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