Tina M Zottoli, Rebecca K Helm, Vanessa A Edkins, Michael T Bixter
{"title":"建立认罪决策模型:模糊轨迹理论、要旨和分类界限。","authors":"Tina M Zottoli, Rebecca K Helm, Vanessa A Edkins, Michael T Bixter","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000532","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To date, most research on plea bargaining has used some form of the shadow of the trial (SOT) model to frame defendant decisions. In this research, we proposed and tested a new conceptual model of plea decision-making, based on fuzzy-trace theory (FTT), for the context in which a nondetained, guilty defendant chooses between a guilty plea or trial, where both the plea and potential trial sentence entail incarceration.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>We predicted that plea decisions would be affected by (a) meaningful, categorical changes in conviction probability (e.g., low to moderate, moderate to high), as opposed to more granular changes within categories and (b) the presence and magnitude of categorical distinctions between plea offer and potential trial sentence rather than fine-grained differences between individual offers.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We conducted three vignette-based experiments (Study 1: N = 1,701, Study 2: N = 1,098, Study 3: N = 1,232), using Mechanical Turk participants. In Studies 1 and 2, we manipulated potential trial sentence and conviction probability, asking participants to indicate either the maximum plea sentence they would accept (Study 1) or whether they would plead guilty to a specific offer (Study 2). In Study 3, we manipulated plea discount and potential trial sentence and measured plea acceptance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Maximum acceptable plea sentences were similar within and different between \"groupings\" of meaningfully similar conviction probabilities (Study 1). Plea rates were similar within and different between groupings that comprised plea offers of similarly meaningful distance from the potential trial sentence (Study 3). The results also provide insight into the plea rates that might be expected under different combinations of the independent variables (Studies 2 and 3).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These results support a new conceptual model of plea decision-making that may be better suited to explaining case-level differences in plea outcomes than the SOT model and suggest that future research extending this model to a wider range of contexts would be fruitful. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48230,"journal":{"name":"Law and Human Behavior","volume":"47 3","pages":"403-421"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Developing a model of guilty plea decision-making: Fuzzy-trace theory, gist, and categorical boundaries.\",\"authors\":\"Tina M Zottoli, Rebecca K Helm, Vanessa A Edkins, Michael T Bixter\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/lhb0000532\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To date, most research on plea bargaining has used some form of the shadow of the trial (SOT) model to frame defendant decisions. In this research, we proposed and tested a new conceptual model of plea decision-making, based on fuzzy-trace theory (FTT), for the context in which a nondetained, guilty defendant chooses between a guilty plea or trial, where both the plea and potential trial sentence entail incarceration.</p><p><strong>Hypotheses: </strong>We predicted that plea decisions would be affected by (a) meaningful, categorical changes in conviction probability (e.g., low to moderate, moderate to high), as opposed to more granular changes within categories and (b) the presence and magnitude of categorical distinctions between plea offer and potential trial sentence rather than fine-grained differences between individual offers.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We conducted three vignette-based experiments (Study 1: N = 1,701, Study 2: N = 1,098, Study 3: N = 1,232), using Mechanical Turk participants. In Studies 1 and 2, we manipulated potential trial sentence and conviction probability, asking participants to indicate either the maximum plea sentence they would accept (Study 1) or whether they would plead guilty to a specific offer (Study 2). In Study 3, we manipulated plea discount and potential trial sentence and measured plea acceptance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Maximum acceptable plea sentences were similar within and different between \\\"groupings\\\" of meaningfully similar conviction probabilities (Study 1). Plea rates were similar within and different between groupings that comprised plea offers of similarly meaningful distance from the potential trial sentence (Study 3). The results also provide insight into the plea rates that might be expected under different combinations of the independent variables (Studies 2 and 3).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These results support a new conceptual model of plea decision-making that may be better suited to explaining case-level differences in plea outcomes than the SOT model and suggest that future research extending this model to a wider range of contexts would be fruitful. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48230,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law and Human Behavior\",\"volume\":\"47 3\",\"pages\":\"403-421\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"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/lhb0000532\",\"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/lhb0000532","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
目的:迄今为止,关于认罪求情协议的大多数研究都使用某种形式的审判阴影(SOT)模型来框定被告的决策。在本研究中,我们基于模糊轨迹理论(FTT),提出并测试了一个新的认罪求情决策概念模型,该模型适用于未被拘留的有罪被告在认罪求情或审判之间做出选择的情况,在这种情况下,认罪求情和潜在的审判判决都会导致监禁:我们预测,认罪决定将受到以下因素的影响:(a)定罪概率的有意义的分类变化(如从低到中,从中度到高度),而不是分类内更细化的变化;(b)认罪提议和潜在审判判决之间的分类差异的存在和程度,而不是单个提议之间的细化差异:我们使用 Mechanical Turk 参与者进行了三项基于小插图的实验(研究 1:N = 1,701;研究 2:N = 1,098;研究 3:N = 1,232)。在研究 1 和研究 2 中,我们操纵了潜在的审判量刑和定罪概率,要求参与者指出他们愿意接受的最高认罪量刑(研究 1)或他们是否会对特定提议认罪(研究 2)。在研究 3 中,我们操纵了认罪折扣和潜在审判刑期,并测量了认罪接受度:结果:在定罪概率有意义地相似的 "组别 "内和 "组别 "之间,可接受的最大认罪量刑相似而不同(研究 1)。认罪率在认罪提议与潜在审判量刑之间具有相似意义的 "组别 "内相似,而在不同组别之间则不同(研究 3)。研究结果还揭示了在不同的自变量组合下可能出现的认罪率(研究2和研究3):这些结果支持了一种新的认罪求情决策概念模型,该模型可能比SOT模型更适合解释认罪求情结果在案件层面上的差异,并表明未来将该模型扩展到更广泛背景下的研究将是富有成效的。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)。
Developing a model of guilty plea decision-making: Fuzzy-trace theory, gist, and categorical boundaries.
Objectives: To date, most research on plea bargaining has used some form of the shadow of the trial (SOT) model to frame defendant decisions. In this research, we proposed and tested a new conceptual model of plea decision-making, based on fuzzy-trace theory (FTT), for the context in which a nondetained, guilty defendant chooses between a guilty plea or trial, where both the plea and potential trial sentence entail incarceration.
Hypotheses: We predicted that plea decisions would be affected by (a) meaningful, categorical changes in conviction probability (e.g., low to moderate, moderate to high), as opposed to more granular changes within categories and (b) the presence and magnitude of categorical distinctions between plea offer and potential trial sentence rather than fine-grained differences between individual offers.
Method: We conducted three vignette-based experiments (Study 1: N = 1,701, Study 2: N = 1,098, Study 3: N = 1,232), using Mechanical Turk participants. In Studies 1 and 2, we manipulated potential trial sentence and conviction probability, asking participants to indicate either the maximum plea sentence they would accept (Study 1) or whether they would plead guilty to a specific offer (Study 2). In Study 3, we manipulated plea discount and potential trial sentence and measured plea acceptance.
Results: Maximum acceptable plea sentences were similar within and different between "groupings" of meaningfully similar conviction probabilities (Study 1). Plea rates were similar within and different between groupings that comprised plea offers of similarly meaningful distance from the potential trial sentence (Study 3). The results also provide insight into the plea rates that might be expected under different combinations of the independent variables (Studies 2 and 3).
Conclusions: These results support a new conceptual model of plea decision-making that may be better suited to explaining case-level differences in plea outcomes than the SOT model and suggest that future research extending this model to a wider range of contexts would be fruitful. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
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.