資料載入處理中...
臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統
:::
網站導覽
國圖首頁
聯絡我們
操作說明
English
行動版
(3.141.3.163)
登入
字型:
**字體大小變更功能,需開啟瀏覽器的JAVASCRIPT,如您的瀏覽器不支援,
IE6請利用鍵盤按住ALT鍵 + V → X → (G)最大(L)較大(M)中(S)較小(A)小,來選擇適合您的文字大小,
如為IE7以上、Firefoxy或Chrome瀏覽器則可利用鍵盤 Ctrl + (+)放大 (-)縮小來改變字型大小。
來源文獻查詢
引文查詢
瀏覽查詢
作者權威檔
引用/點閱統計
我的研究室
資料庫說明
相關網站
來源文獻查詢
/
簡易查詢
/
查詢結果列表
/
詳目列表
:::
詳目顯示
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆
/1
頁
來源文獻資料
摘要
外文摘要
引文資料
題名:
民意支持死刑的態度可改變嗎?
書刊名:
國立臺灣大學法學論叢
作者:
周愫嫻
作者(外文):
Jou, Sus-yan
出版日期:
2017
卷期:
46:2
頁次:
頁553-588
主題關鍵詞:
死刑
;
民意
;
死刑替代方案
;
衝突價值
;
Death penalty
;
Public opinion
;
Alternative to death penalty
;
Value conflict
原始連結:
連回原系統網址
相關次數:
被引用次數:期刊(
2
) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
排除自我引用:
2
共同引用:
35
點閱:67
臺灣是一個嚴刑重罰的社會嗎?這種嚴刑重罰是否近年愈發強烈?2014 年的中研院與廢死聯盟的民意調查報告結果,似乎支持這個結論,因為支持死刑的比例高達82%。然而,這種態度不可改變嗎?本文以2014 年中研院與臺灣廢死聯盟收集的民意調查資料分析顯示,至少三種因素可以改變人們反對廢死的態度:第一,提供死刑相關知識與訊息,第二,提供各種不同的替代死刑的方案,第三,找到一群心中具有多重與死刑相關衝突價值觀的民眾,因為他們最容易因為環境與條件的改變而轉變心意。至於改變的比例,第一種比較有限,約5%民眾會因增加訊息,改而支持廢死;第二種非常有效,約47%民眾會因有替代方案,改而支持廢死,尤其終身監禁不得假釋,且需工作賠償被害人的替代方案,更能使得63%民眾改而支持廢死;第三種則更為有效,因為人們對於死刑存廢的看法,經常處於矛盾價值選擇中。大部分的人在選擇對死刑應否廢除時,也常「三心二意」或心意未決,譬如:又支持個人主義,也支持集體主義;同時關心冤案,也擔心縱放;有高被害恐懼,又覺得社區很安全;既認為刑罰應該有矯治效果,也認為要有嚇阻與應報功能。本研究發現心中愈認知到這些矛盾價值的民眾,可改變性愈高。
以文找文
Is Taiwan a punitive society? Or Taiwan has become more and more towards punitive? A survey conducted by Academia Sinica and the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty in 2014 showed that 82% of the public supported the death penalty in Taiwan. It seems to support that Taiwan is indeed a punitive society. However, the research question raised by this study is whether or not the strong public support on death penalty can be changed. This present study analyzed the same 2014 survey data and found that it is possible to change the public opinion on death penalty. There are at least three methods to do so. First, 5% of the public would change their attitudes to support abolishment if more information/knowledge is provided. Second, 47% of the public would change their attitudes to support abolishment if alternative punishments are offered. The most effective alternative punishment preferred is the life sentence without parole plus prison work to compensate the victims (63% ). Last, most of the public have an ambiguous attitude to death penalty, for example, they support both individualism and collectivism, concern with both innocent cases and criminals found not-guilty in courts, have higher fear of crime but feel safe in the community, and perceived both rehabilitation and deterrence/retribution as the purposes of punishment. Nevertheless, these people who face the most value conflicts are most likely to change their originally positive attitudes of death penalty to abolishment. This study has demonstrated that the public opinion on death penalty are not as firm or unchangble as the government or society claims.
以文找文
期刊論文
1.
侯崇文(19971200)。治亂世用重典社會意向之研究。犯罪學期刊,3,43-57。
延伸查詢
2.
顏厥安(20110100)。毒藥與十字架。思想,17,151-172。
延伸查詢
3.
Sprott, J. B.、Doob, A. N.(1997)。Fear, victimization, and attitudes to sentencing, the courts, and the police。The Canadian Journal of Criminology,39(3),275-291。
4.
Taylor, D. G.、Scheppele, K. L.、Stinchcombe, A. L.(1979)。Salience of crime and support for harsher criminal sanctions。Social Problems,26(4),413-424。
5.
Bauman, Z.(2000)。Social issues of law and order。The British Journal of Criminology,40(2),205-221。
6.
Brewer, M. B.、Chen, Y.-R.(2007)。Where (who) are collectives in collectivism? Toward conceptual clarification of individualism and collectivism。Psychological Review,114(1),133-151。
7.
Bakken, B.(2011)。China, a punitive society?。Asian Criminology,6(1),33-50。
8.
謝靜琪(20081200)。死刑意向性別差異之初探。刑事政策與犯罪研究論文集,11,23-50。
延伸查詢
9.
Craig, S. C.、Kane, J. G.、Martinez, M. D.(2002)。Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't: citizens' ambivalence about abortion。Political Psychology,23(2),285-301。
10.
Craig, S. C.、Martinez, M. D.、Kane, J. G.、Gainous, J.(2005)。Core values, value conflict, and citizens' ambivalence about gay rights。Political Research Quarterly,58(1),5-17。
11.
Newby-Clark, I. R.、McGregor, I.、Zanna, M. P.(2002)。Thinking and caring about cognitive inconsistency: When and for whom does attitudinal ambivalence feel uncomfortable?。Journal of personality and social psychology,82(2),157-166。
12.
McCord, D.(1998)。Imagining a retributivist alternative to capital punishment。Florida Law Review,50(1),1-143。
13.
Zaller, J.、Feldman, S.(1992)。A simple theory of the survey response: Answering questions versus revealing preferences。American journal of political science,36(3),579-616。
14.
Tyler, T. R.、Boeckmann, R. J.(1997)。Three strikes and you are out but why? The psychology of public support for punishing rule breakers。Law & Society Review,31(2),237-265。
15.
許家馨(20140900)。應報即復仇?--當代應報理論及其對死刑之意涵初探。中研院法學期刊,15,207-282。
延伸查詢
圖書
1.
Johnson, D. T.、Zimring, F. E.(2009)。The next frontier: National development, political change, and the death penalty in Asia。Oxford University Press。
2.
台灣廢除死刑推動聯盟(2014)。死刑民意與價值初步報告。臺北:台灣廢除死刑推動聯盟。
延伸查詢
3.
Hollway, W.、Jefferson, T.(1997)。Doing narrative research differently: Free Association, Narrative and the Interview Method。London, England:Sage。
4.
Lester, D.(1998)。The death penalty: issues and answers。Springfield, IL:Clarles C. Thomas。
5.
Sato, M.、Johnson, D.、Tagusari, M.、Lehrfreund, S.、Jabbar, P.(2013)。The death penalty in Japan: a report on Japan's legal obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and an assessment of public attitudes to capital punishment。London, England:The Death Penalty Project。
6.
Rothman, D. J.(1971)。The discovery of the asylum: social order and disorder in the New Republic。Boston, MA:Little, Brown & Company。
7.
Garland, David(2001)。The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society。Oxford University Press。
8.
Zimring, Franklin E.、Hawkins, Gordon、Kamin, Sam(2001)。Punishment and Democracy: Three Strikes and You're Out in California。Oxford University Press。
其他
1.
陳澤憲(2011)。為什麼取消13項死刑罪名,http://www.iolaw.org.cn/showNews.aspx?id=26012。
延伸查詢
2.
法務部(2013)。2009年修復式司法試行方案,http://www.moj.gov.tw/lp.asp?ctNode=33533&CtUnit=10810&BaseDSD=7&mp=001。
3.
Manting(2014)。死刑不能拿來譴責殺勠,它本身就是殺戮,http://www.thinkingtaiwan.com/content/2014。
延伸查詢
圖書論文
1.
Bakken, B.(2013)。Capital punishment reform, public opinion, and penal elitism in the People's Republic of China。Confronting capital punishment in Asia: human rights, politics, and public opinion。New York, NY:Oxford University Press。
2.
Converse, P. E.(1970)。Attitudes and non-attitudes: Continuation of a dialogue。The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems。Boston, MA:Addison and Wesley。
3.
Braithwaite, J.(2011)。In search of restorative Jurisprudence。Why punish? how much? a reader on punishment。Oxford, England:Oxford University Press。
4.
Hegel, G. W. F.(2011)。Wrong。Why punish? how much? A reader on punishment。Oxford, England:Oxford University Press。
5.
Gross, S. R.、Holtz, R.、Miller, N.(1995)。Attitude certainty。Attitude strength: antecedents and consequences。Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum。
6.
Maruna, S.、King, A.(2008)。Public opinion and community penalties。Crime and crime policy (Vol 3): fear of crime--pinitivity new development in theory and research。Bochum:Universitatsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer。
7.
Kant, I.(2011)。The penal law and the law of pardon。Why punish? how much? a reader on punishment。Oxford, England:Oxford University Press。
8.
Hough, M.、Park, A.(1996)。How malleable are attitudes to crime and punishment? Findings from a British deliberative poll。Changing attitudes to punishment。London, England:Willan。
9.
Zimring, F. E.(2013)。State execution: is Asia different and why?。Confronting capital punishemnt in Asia: human rights, politics, and public opinion。New York, NY:Oxford University Press。
10.
Tonry, M.(2011)。Introduction: thinking about punishment。Why punish? how much? a reader on punishment。Oxford, England:Oxford University Press。
推文
當script無法執行時可按︰
推文
推薦
當script無法執行時可按︰
推薦
引用網址
當script無法執行時可按︰
引用網址
引用嵌入語法
當script無法執行時可按︰
引用嵌入語法
轉寄
當script無法執行時可按︰
轉寄
top
:::
相關期刊
相關論文
相關專書
相關著作
熱門點閱
1.
正義理論與刑罰應報理論之重構
2.
建構量刑階段中罪刑相當原則的第一哩路--自應報觀點形塑刑罰量定之理論嘗試
3.
談死刑案件中之教化可能性
4.
探討青少年偏差行為嚴重程度對社會助長效應之影響
5.
累犯加重其刑之憲法上限制--論美國法對我國法之啟示
6.
經濟人的法經濟學vs法律人的法經濟分析--答賀劍教授等師友之書評
7.
中國的死刑:挑戰與展望
8.
減刑規定與罪刑相當原則:從釋字第790號反思重刑化的毒品政策
9.
罪刑相當原則之理論初探--以釋字第775號解釋為楔子
10.
Welzel對當今刑法學的重要性
11.
試析反廢死:「若你至親受此對待」與「被害者人權何在」的論述脈絡
12.
當前司法的脈動--以正義為中心
13.
恐龍法官真的恐龍嗎?從大眾與法官的邏輯假設分析之
14.
法理學/法社會學發展專題回顧:2014~2016年學界動態與文獻回顧
15.
2009至2016年隨機殺人事件對臺灣死刑存廢的反省
1.
死刑制裁之政策分析
2.
教育的存有向度: 梅洛龐蒂存在現象學的人文意涵及教育蘊義
3.
從先秦儒、道、墨、法之法律倫理思想論死刑
4.
酒醉駕駛人特性及其影響因素之實證研究
5.
擄人勒贖犯罪及其偵查預防策略之研究
無相關書籍
無相關著作
1.
從先秦儒、道、墨、法之法律倫理思想論死刑
QR Code