Biocriminology and the Adjudication of Criminal Responsibility: Is There a Consensus Among Scientists' Verdicts?
調査の概要
詳細な説明
In this study, closely inspired by the paradigms of Berryessa, Coppola, and Salvato, perspectives on punishment based on psychobiological explanations of behaviour are assessed, aiming to understand how scientists with knowledge of human psychobiology versus lay people (of similar educational level) interpret offending behaviour. Human-science is contrasted to natural-science/arts graduates because the former have been exposed to and may possess scientific knowledge that shapes their understanding of behaviour, their views, and potential (essentialist) biases. In contrast, non-scientists have been found to possess scientific misconceptions that can impact their sentencing decisions. This leads to the question whether scientists may draw different judgements based on their professional knowledge and experience with psychological phenomena. If indeed scientists with greater insight on human behaviour are found to hold less punitive views on punishment and rehabilitation, that has important implications for criminal justice systems that rely on lay peoples' understanding of science.
One hundred sixty participants who completed all study procedures (2 main groups of 80 participants) will be surveyed. A sample size calculation was performed using G*Power version 3.1.9.4, based on Berryessa and colleagues who conducted a similar survey study in 2021 with comparable outcome measures and analyses. The required effect size is based upon approximately 3-4 outcome measures. The primary research question is between-groups, while secondary ones include within groups measures. Based on the power analysis, a sample of 160 participants will be targeted, which is enough for sufficient power for f = 0.25, power = 0.80, df = 4, for 2 different groups.
研究の種類
入学 (実際)
段階
- 適用できない
連絡先と場所
研究場所
-
-
South Holland
-
Leiden、South Holland、オランダ、2333 AK
- Leiden University
-
-
参加基準
適格基準
就学可能な年齢
健康ボランティアの受け入れ
受講資格のある性別
説明
Inclusion Criteria:
- Aged between 18 and 65
- Holding a university diploma or equivalent
Exclusion Criteria:
- Participants who did not complete the survey (appropriately) will be excluded
研究計画
研究はどのように設計されていますか?
デザインの詳細
- 主な目的:基礎科学
- 割り当て:ランダム化
- 介入モデル:並列代入
- マスキング:ダブル
武器と介入
参加者グループ / アーム |
介入・治療 |
---|---|
実験的:Human Science
Arm 1 will include university graduates that hold at least a science undergraduate degree (or equivalent) in human science, including psychology, neuroscience, human biology, or medicine.
|
Participants in each of the two main groups see a case with and a case without a neurobiological explanation for criminal offending.
|
アクティブコンパレータ:Natural or non-science
Arm 2 will include university graduates from non-human or non-scientific fields such as engineering, history, language studies, or law.
|
Participants in each of the two main groups see a case with and a case without a neurobiological explanation for criminal offending.
|
この研究は何を測定していますか?
主要な結果の測定
結果測定 |
メジャーの説明 |
時間枠 |
---|---|---|
Sentencing severity on 5-point questionnaire
時間枠:Immediately after case presentation, an average of 1 minute.
|
This is the primary outcome measure of attitudes towards sentencing, measured via a questionnaire on a visual analogue scale from 1 (only treatment) to 5 (more than 5 years in prison)
|
Immediately after case presentation, an average of 1 minute.
|
協力者と研究者
研究記録日
主要日程の研究
研究開始 (実際)
一次修了 (実際)
研究の完了 (実際)
試験登録日
最初に提出
QC基準を満たした最初の提出物
最初の投稿 (実際)
学習記録の更新
投稿された最後の更新 (実際)
QC基準を満たした最後の更新が送信されました
最終確認日
詳しくは
本研究に関する用語
キーワード
その他の研究ID番号
- 2021-07-16-D.S.V.-V2-3332
個々の参加者データ (IPD) の計画
個々の参加者データ (IPD) を共有する予定はありますか?
IPD プランの説明
IPD 共有時間枠
IPD 共有アクセス基準
IPD 共有サポート情報タイプ
- STUDY_PROTOCOL
- ANALYTIC_CODE
医薬品およびデバイス情報、研究文書
米国FDA規制医薬品の研究
米国FDA規制機器製品の研究
この情報は、Web サイト clinicaltrials.gov から変更なしで直接取得したものです。研究の詳細を変更、削除、または更新するリクエストがある場合は、register@clinicaltrials.gov。 までご連絡ください。 clinicaltrials.gov に変更が加えられるとすぐに、ウェブサイトでも自動的に更新されます。