본문 바로가기
KERD
논문

사법판단에서 조절초점의 효과: 선택적 정보처리의 역할

The Effects of Regulatory Focus on Legal Decision Making: the Role of Selective Information Processing

김혜진|허태균|윤상연
한국사회및성격심리학회|2021.02|한국심리학회지: 사회및성격 (Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology)|제35권 제1호|pp. 99-119|DOI 10.21193/kjspp.2021.35.1.005

0

조회

0

다운로드

1

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

regulatory focus조절초점legal decision making사법판단선택적 정보처리목표와 동기selective information processinggoals and motivations
주제분류심리과학

초록

본 연구는 조절초점 이론에 기초하여 향상초점과 예방초점이 사법판단에 미치는 효과를 검증하였다. 특히 처벌요소와 감경요소가 혼재해 있는 형사사건에 있어서 조절초점이 처벌판단(처벌강도 및 형량)에 미치는 효과와 그 심리적 기제를 밝히고자 하였다. 연구 1에서는 조절초점성향과 처벌판단의 관계, 그리고 선택적 정보처리의 역할을 확인하였다. 시나리오를 이용한 설문조사 결과 조절초점성향과 처벌강도 간의 관계를 정보선택 과정이 매개하는 것으로 나타났다. 즉, 향상초점이 지배적일수록 높은 수준의 처벌을 하였고, 처벌수준에 부합하는 정보를 선택적으로 고려하였다. 연구 2에서는 조절초점을 조작하여 연구 1의 결과를 인과적인 수준에서 재검증하는 연구를 수행하였다. 예방초점과 향상초점을 조작한 두 가지 조건에서 처벌판단과 정보선택 특성을 확인한 결과 연구 1의 결과와 동일하게 조절초점 조건별로 처벌강도가 달랐고, 선택적인 정보처리가 이 관계를 매개하고 있었다. 연구 3에서는 사법판단에서 조절초점에 따른 판단목표의 효과가 달라지는지를 확인함으로써 조절초점의 효과를 동기적 측면에서 밝히고자 하였다. 처벌판단에 대한 판단목표의 효과는 조절초점 집단에 따라 차이가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 즉, 향상초점이 지배적인 집단은 판단목표에 따른 처벌판단 차이가 컸지만, 예방초점이 지배적인 집단은 판단목표에 따른 처벌판단 차이가 작았다. 본 연구를 통해 처벌판단에 대한 조절초점의 효과는 선택적 정보처리에 의해 매개되며, 동기화된 목표에 영향을 받는 과정임을 확인하였다. 마지막으로 논의에서는 연구결과의 사법판단 적용 가능성과 추후 연구 방향을 제안하였다.

Abstract

Based on regulatory focus theory, the current study tested the effect of promotion and prevention foci on legal decision making. In particular, it aimed to uncover the effects of regulatory focus on penalization (punishment level and sentence) in criminal cases and the underlying psychological mechanism. Study 1 verified the relation between regulatory focus and penalization as well as the role of selective information processing. The result of a survey with a case scenario showed that information selection process mediated the relation between regulatory focus and level of punishment. That is, stronger the promotion focus, higher the level of punishment and larger the ratio for considering the information in accordance with the punishment level. Study 2 re-verified the results of study 1 in terms of causal relations. As the result of an experiment with priming regulatory focus to see the pattern of penalization and information processing, selective information processing mediated the two variables in penalization process in accordance with regulatory focus (only for punishment level), which was in line with the result of study 1. Study 3 aimed to find the effects of regulatory focus in terms of motivation by verifying whether the effects of judgment goal change in accordance with regulatory focus. The effects of judgment goal differed depending on regulatory focus conditions. That is, with stronger promotion focus the difference in punishment level was larger, whereas it was smaller when prevention focus was predominant. The current study showed that the effects of regulatory focus on penalization was mediated by selective information processing and influenced by motivated goals. Lastly, the applicability of the current results in criminal judgment and suggestions for future research were discussed.

참고문헌 (74)

  1. 고민조, "피고인의 성격증거로 유도된 편향 감소 방안", 한국심리학회지:법, 11(1), pp.63~87 (2020), 한국법심리학회[DOI]
  2. 김상준, "사실인정과 의사결정 모델에 관한 법심리학적 연구동향", 법학평론, 5, pp.8~66 (2015)
  3. 김청택, "법정의사결정에서의 판사들의 인지편향", 서울대학교 법학, 51(4), pp.317~345 (2010), 법학연구소
  4. 박광배, "가상적인 재판 쟁점에서의 현역판사의 판단과 모의배심의 집단판단에 대한 인지적 방략의 효과", 한국심리학회지: 문화 및 사회문제, 11(1), pp.59~84 (2005), 한국문화및사회문제심리학회
  5. 박미숙, "형사정책과 사법제도에 관한 평가연구(XⅢ): 국민참여재판 시행10년차 평가와 정책방안 연구" (2019), 한국형사정책연구원
  6. 이다니, "강간사건의 사실인정에 대한 양형인자와 편향요인의 효과: 피해자나이와 판단자성별", 한국심리학회지:법, 8(3), pp.213~228 (2017), 한국법심리학회
  7. 이상돈, "(새로 쓴)법이론" (2005), 세창
  8. 이유미, "사법적 의사결정시 나타나는 배심원 판단편향: 검사구형량의 정박효과", 한국심리학회지:법, 11(3), pp.329~347 (2020), 한국법심리학회[DOI]
  9. 한유화, "유일한 증거와 일반인의 법적 판단: 과대추정된 사후확률과 유무죄 판단의 역치", 한국심리학회지:법, 9(1), pp.1~19 (2018), 한국법심리학회
  10. Baron, R. M., "The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research : Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), pp.1173~1182 (1986)
  11. Bargh, J. A., "The automaticity of everyday life", pp.1~62 (1997), Erlbaum
  12. Bargh, J. A., "The automated will : Nonconscious activation and pursuit of behavioral goals", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6), pp.1014~1027 (2001)
  13. Becker, G. S., "Crime and punishment : An economic approach", Journal of Political Economy, 76, pp.1~54 (1968)
  14. Bornstein, B. H., "The jury under fire: Myth, controversy, and reform" (2017), Oxford University Press
  15. Bruner, J. S., "A study of thinking" (1956), Wiley
  16. Bryant, P., "The influence of regulatory focus on risky decision-making", Applied Psychology, 57(2), pp.335~359 (2008)
  17. Camacho, C. J., "Moral value transfer from regulatory fit : What feels right is right and what feels wrong is wrong", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(3), pp.498~510 (2003)
  18. Carlsmith, K. M., "Why do we punish? : Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(2), pp.284~299 (2002)
  19. Clark, J., "Five factor model personality traits, jury selection, and case outcomes in criminal and civil cases", Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(5), pp.641~660 (2007)
  20. Codini, A. P., "Why not promote promotion for green consumption? The controversial role of regulatory focus", European Business Review, 30(5), pp.554~570 (2018)
  21. Crowe, E., "Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations : Promotion and prevention in decision-making", Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69(2), pp.117~132 (1997)
  22. Dholakia, U. M., "The role of regulatory focus in the experience and self-control of desire for temptations", Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(2), pp.163~175 (2006)
  23. Eisenberg, T., "Judge-jury agreement in criminal cases : A partial replication of Kalven and Zeisel's The American Jury", Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 2(1), pp.171~207 (2005)
  24. Feigenson, N., "Legal blame: How jurors think and talk about accidents" (2000), American Psychological Association
  25. Fiske, S. T., "Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2)" (2010), John Wiley & Sons
  26. Fiske, S. T., "Social Cognition" (1991), Mcgraw-Hill Book Company
  27. Förster, J., "Temporal construal effects on abstract and concrete thinking : Consequences for insight and creative cognition", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(2), pp.177~189 (2004)
  28. Frey, D., "Recent research on selective exposure to information", Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19(1), pp.41~80 (1986)
  29. Friedman, R. S., "The effects of promotion and prevention cues on creativity", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6), pp.1001~1013 (2001)
  30. Gewirtz, P., "On"I know it when I see it"", Yale Law Journal, 105, pp.1023~1047 (1996)
  31. Goodenough, O. R., "Mapping cortical areas associated with legal reasoning and moral intuition", Jurimetrics, 41, pp.429~442 (2001)
  32. Graziano, S. J., "Individual differences in information processing strategies and their role in juror decision making and selection", Forensic Reports, 3(3), pp.279~301 (1990)
  33. Guthrie, C., "Inside the judicial mind", Cornell Law and Review, 86, pp.777~830 (2000)
  34. Hagan, J., "Extra-legal attributes and criminal sentencing : An assessment of a sociological viewpoint", Law and Society Review, 8, pp.357~284 (1973)
  35. Hart, W., "Feeling validated versus being correct : A meta-analysis of selective exposure to information", Psychological Bulletin, 135(4), pp.555~588 (2009)
  36. Harris, A. P., "Bias and Judging", Annual Review of Political Science, 22, pp.241~259 (2019)
  37. Haws, K. L., "An assessment of chronic regulatory focus measures", Journal of Marketing Research, 47(5), pp.967~982 (2010)
  38. Higgins, E. T., "The"self digest" : Selfknowledge serving self-regulatory functions", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(6), pp.1062~1083 (1996)
  39. Higgins, E. T., "Beyond pleasure and pain", American Psychologist, 52(12), pp.1280~1300 (1997)
  40. Higgins, E. T., "How self-regulation creates distinct values : The case of promotion and prevention decision making", Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12(3), pp.177~191 (2002)
  41. Higgins, E. T., "Beyond pleasure and pain : How motivation works" (2011), Oxford University Press
  42. Higgins, E. T., "Achievement orientations from subjective histories of success : Promotion pride versus prevention pride", European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(1), pp.3~23 (2001)
  43. Kaplan, M. F., "Juror judgment as information integration : Combining evidential and nonevidential information", Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 30(4), pp.493~499 (1974)
  44. Kim, S., "Judge-jury agreement in criminal cases : The first three years of the Korean jury system", Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 10(1), pp.35~53 (2013)
  45. Korobkin, R. B., "Law and behavioral science : Removing the rationality assumption from law and economics", California Law Review, 88(4), pp.1051~1144 (2000)
  46. Kumar, R., "Self-regulation and expatriate adjustment : the role of regulatory fit", Human Resource Management Review, 29(4), pp.00666~ (2019)
  47. Kramer, J. H., "Sentencing Guidelines: Lessons from Pennsylvania" (2009), Lynne Rienner Publishers
  48. Lee, A. Y., "The pleasures and pains of distinct self-construals : The role of interdependence in regulatory focus", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(6), pp.1122~1134 (2000)
  49. Locke, E. A., "Goals and intentions as mediators of the effects of monetary incentives on behavior", Journal of Applied Psychology, 52(2), pp.104~121 (1968)
  50. MacKinnon, D., "Introduction to statistical mediation analysis" (2008), Routledge
  51. Montesquieu, B. D., "The spirit of the laws (Vol. 2)" (1949), Hafner Press
  52. Moran, G., "Scientific juror selection : Sex as a moderator of demographic and personality predictors of impaneled felonyjuror behavior", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(5), pp.1052~1063 (1982)
  53. Orth, U., "Punishment goals of crime victims", Law and Human Behavior, 27(2), pp.173~186 (2003)
  54. Oswald, M. E., "Lay-perspectives on criminal deviance, goals of punishment, and punitivity", Social Justice Research, 15(2), pp.85~98 (2002)
  55. Pennington, N., "Explaining the evidence : Tests of the Story Model for juror decision making", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(2), pp.189~206 (1992)
  56. Pennington, N., "Reasoning in explanation-based decision making", Cognition, 49(1), pp.123~163 (1993)
  57. Pham, M. T., "Ideals and oughts and the reliance on affect versus substance in persuasion", Journal of Consumer Research, 30(4), pp.503~518 (2004)
  58. Pham, M. T., "Regulatory focus, regulatory fit, and the search and consideration of choice alternatives", Journal of Consumer Research, 37(4), pp.626~640 (2010)
  59. Pham, M. T., "Inside consumption: Consumer motives, goals, and desires", pp.8~43 (2005), Routledge
  60. Posner, R. A., "An economic theory of the criminal law", Columbia Law Review, 85, pp.1193~1231 (1985)
  61. Rachlinski, J. J., "Does unconscious racial bias affect trial judges", Notre Dame Law Review, 84, pp.1195~2269 (2009)
  62. Sanbonmatsu, D. M., "Selective hypothesis testing", Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5(2), pp.197~220 (1998)
  63. "Is there a psychology of judging? Harvard University Faculty Research Working Project Series" (2008)[URL]
  64. Scholer, A. A., "Responding to negativity : How a risky tactic can serve a vigilant strategy", Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(3), pp.767~774 (2008)
  65. Simon, H. A., "Theories of bounded rationality", Decision and organization, 1(1), pp.161~176 (1972)
  66. Simon, D., "A third view of the black box : Cognitive coherence in legal decision making", The University of Chicago Law Review, 71(2), pp.511~586 (2004)
  67. Simon, D., "In doubt: The psychology of the criminal justice process" (2012), Harvard University Press
  68. Simon, D., "On the objectivity of investigations: An experiment", Paper presented at the Conference for Empirical Legal Studies (2008)
  69. Uskul, A. K., "The cultural congruency effect: Culture, regulatory focus, and the effectiveness of gain-vs. loss-framed health messages", Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(3), pp.535~541 (2009)
  70. Voeten, E., "Gender and Judging: Evidence from the European Court of Human Rights", SSRN Electronic Journal, (3322607) (2019)
  71. Wallace, J. C., "A multilevel model of employee innovation : Understanding the effects of regulatory focus, thriving, and employee involvement climate", Journal of Management, 42(4), pp.982~1004 (2016)
  72. Weiner, B., "Judgments of responsibility: A foundation for a theory of social conduct" (1995), Guilford Press
  73. Wistrich, A. J., "Can judges ignore inadmissible information? : The difficulty of deliberately disregarding", University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 153, pp.1251~1345 (2005)
  74. Zhu, R. J., "Exploring the cognitive mechanism that underlies regulatory focus effects", Journal of Consumer Research, 34(1), pp.89~96 (2007)

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (4건)

비행전력이 재범위험성에 미치는 영향: 부정적 자기사고와 진로포기의 매개효과김지근, 최윤영, 이승욱pp. 1-17피의자와 변호인의 조서정정 수행 비교연구조은경, 이미선, 이형근pp. 19-41한국형 다차원 성격검사 단축형(Bright and Dark Personality Inventory-Short Form: BDPI-SF) 개발서동기, 최기홍, 한여울, 박두진, 최정욱pp. 43-67창의적 성격용 조건추론검사의 확장: 새로운 정당화 기제 제안 및 타당화문혜진, 이혜주, 엄정혜, 장재윤pp. 69-97
원문 보기