The role of prior punishment in preventive detention decisions

Preventive detention legislation allows for ongoing detention or supervision following completion of an offender’s sentence. Consideration of public protection should drive the administration of preventive detention, however research has indicated retributive concerns also drive decision making. Two...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Authors: Bojczenko, Mickael N. (Author) ; Sivasubramaniam, Diane (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: 2020
In: Psychology, crime & law
Year: 2020, Volume: 26, Issue: 5, Pages: 479-506
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002c 4500
001 1765843871
003 DE-627
005 20210806082644.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 210806s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1080/1068316X.2019.1690654  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1765843871 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1765843871 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
100 1 |a Bojczenko, Mickael N.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 4 |a The role of prior punishment in preventive detention decisions 
264 1 |c 2020 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Preventive detention legislation allows for ongoing detention or supervision following completion of an offender’s sentence. Consideration of public protection should drive the administration of preventive detention, however research has indicated retributive concerns also drive decision making. Two studies were conducted to examine the motives driving preventive detention decisions, and how contextual variables affected the balance between retributive and public protection motives. In Study 1, participants were presented with information about an offender’s remorse, prior punishment, and risk of re-offence. In Study 2, participants were presented with information about an offender’s prior punishment and offence type, and the relative strength of various potential mediators was tested, to determine factors driving effects of prior punishment information. Overall, results demonstrated participants were driven by both retributive and public protection motives, as well as personal characteristics (e.g. political orientation, prejudice against offenders) when making preventive detention decisions. Findings are discussed in terms of their implications for preventive detention legislation. 
650 4 |a Sex Offenders 
650 4 |a Preventive Detention 
650 4 |a punishment sufficiency 
650 4 |a Risk 
650 4 |a Sentencing 
700 1 |a Sivasubramaniam, Diane  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Psychology, crime & law  |d Getzville, NY : HeinOnline, 1994  |g 26(2020), 5, Seite 479-506  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)341903574  |w (DE-600)2070124-X  |w (DE-576)27234995X  |x 1477-2744  |7 nnas 
773 1 8 |g volume:26  |g year:2020  |g number:5  |g pages:479-506 
856 4 0 |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2019.1690654  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 3963342633 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1765843871 
LOK |0 005 20240423155106 
LOK |0 008 210806||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a krzo 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw