RT Article
T1 There ought to be a law, but not for me: hypocritical disjunctures between legal and moral beliefs and low-consensus immoral behaviors
JF Applied psychology in criminal justice
VO 8
IS 2
SP 87
OP 110
A1 Vogel, Brenda
A1 Fradella, Henry F.
A2 Fradella, Henry F.
LA English
YR 2012
UL https://krimdok.uni-tuebingen.de/Record/1919037586
AB Although the scholarly literature on the relationship between law and morality has been largely theoretical, research has empirically linked conceptualizations of morality withboth personal views on formal social control and personal conduct in deviant behaviors. In this study, survey respondents were asked about their moral and legal views on nine low-consensus deviant behaviors, including three drug offenses, three victimless sex offenses, and three criminal traffic offenses, as well as their own history of engaging in the behaviors. Analyses focus on the characteristics of respondents displaying "Belief-Behavior Incongruence"--individuals who believed an act to be immoral and/or felt that the act should be illegal, but nonetheless engaged in the behavior. Significant relationships were found between respondents' belief-behavior incongruent conduct in several lowconsensus deviant behaviors and their gender, religiosity, religion and political party. The socio-legal and theoretical implications of these findings are explored.
NO Literaturverzeichnis: Seite 105-109
K1 Cognitive Dissonance
K1 Deviant behavior
K1 Hypocrisy
K1 Morality
K1 Social Control