| Abstract: | Examined the cognitive processes underlying sentencing decisions made by college students in a judicial decision-making experiment. Ss were asked to follow 1 of 3 punishment strategies (retribution, rehabilitation, or deterrence). In addition, the type of crime and the physical attractiveness of the offender were systematically varied. Length of recommended prison term, Ss' judgments of seriousness of the crime, likelihood of recidivism, and blame attributed to offender and victim were examined. The pattern of strategy effects on prison term recommendations was generally consistent with that found in other studies involving real judges in their actual cases. Deterrence group sentences were the most severe for all crimes, whereas the rehabilitation group sentences were the least severe for serious crimes only. The rehabilitation group Ss consistently blamed the victim of the crime more than did the other groups. This finding is discussed with respect to belief in a just world and defensive attribution. (13 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
