바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

ISSN : 1229-0653

Article Contents

Next
e-Submission

Vol.26 No.3
Citation Share

Lay Judgment for Self-defense Claim: Effects of Individualism and Collectivism

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2012, v.26 no.3, pp.1-12
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2012.26.3.001


& (2012). Lay Judgment for Self-defense Claim: Effects of Individualism and Collectivism. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 26(3), 1-12, https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2012.26.3.001
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

This study was to examine how juror eligible lay people evaluate claims of self-defense generically (i.e., without being informed with its legal definitions). It was hypothesized that, in determination for self-defense claims,individuals of high Collectivism would be stricter than those of high Individualism. The results showed that individualists’ judgment of self-defense did not vary in accordance with the presence or absence of threat imminence in the scenario. On the other hand, collectivists’ judgment of self-defense varied significantly according to the presence or absence of the imminence. Greater proportions of collectivists accepted the defendant’s claim of self-defense when the imminence of threat was present in the scenario than when it was absent. Implications of the results for how to instruct the jurors in the self-defense cases were discussed.

keywords
self-defense, reasonableness, collectivism, individualism, 정당방위, 상당성, 개인주의, 집단주의

Reference

1.

김종대, 이은로, 한상훈 (2011). “합리적 의심의 여지없는 증명” 기준에 대한 배심원의 이해도 연구. 연세대학교 법학연구, 21(2), 1-42.

2.

김태명 (2008). 우리나라에서의 정당방위에 대한 역사적 고찰. 동북아법연구, 2(1), 329-363.

3.

손해목 (1996). 형법총론. 법문사.

4.

양건 (2002). 한국의 법문화와 법의 지배. 한국법철학회, 5(1), 185-202.

5.

이용식 (1994). 정당방위와 긴급피난의 몇 가지 요건. 판례월보, 291, 30-45.

6.

정진연 (2006). 국민참여재판에서 한국형 배심제의 도입, 법학논총 15, 1-22.

7.

조긍호 (1996). 문화유형과 타인이해 양상의 차이. 한국심리학회지, 15(1), 104-139.

8.

최석윤 (2002). 정당방위의 상당성과 사회윤리적 제한. 비교형사법연구, 4(1), 417-436.

9.

하태훈 (2004). 형법 제21조의 정당방위상황. 차용석교수화갑기념논문집, 190.

10.

Choi, I., & Nisbett, R. E. (1998). Situational salience and cultural differences in the correspondence bias and in the actor-observer bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 949-960.

11.

Cousins, S. D. (1989). Culture and self-perception in Japan and the U.S. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 124-131.

12.

Darley, J. M., Carlsmith, K. M., & Robinson, P. H. (2001). The ax ante function of the criminal law. Law and Society Review, 35, 165-189.

13.

Fletcher, G. J. O., & Wrad, C. (1988). Attribution theory and process : Cross-cultural perspective. In M. H. Bond(Ed.), The cross-cultural challenge to social psychology. Newbury Park, CA : Sage.

14.

Horowitz, I. A. & Kirkpatrick, L. C. (1996). A concept in search of a definition: The effects of reasonable doubt instructions on certainty of guilt standards and jury verdicts. Law and Human Behavior, 20(6), 655-670.

15.

Hung, Y., Chiu, C., & Kung, T. M. (1997). Bringing culture out in front: Effects of cultural meaning system activation on social cognition. In K. Leung, Y. Kashima, U. Kim, & S. Yamaguchi (Eds.), Progress in Asian social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 135-146). Singapore: Wiley.

16.

Ji, L., Peng, K., & Nisbett, RE. (2000). Culture, Control, and Perception of Relationships in the Environment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 943-955.

17.

Lee, F., Hallahan, M., & Herzog, T. (1996). Explaining real life events: How culture and domain shape attributions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 732-741.

18.

Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991a). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.

19.

Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991b). Culture variation in the self-concept. In J. Strauss & G. R. Goethals(Eds.), The self : Interdisciplinary approaches. New York : Spring-Verlag.

20.

Masuda, T., & Kitayama, S. (2004). Perceiver-induced constraint and attitudeattribution in Japan and the US: A case for the cultural dependence of the correspondence bias. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 409–416.

21.

Miller, J. G. (1985). Culture and the development of every day social explanation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 9610978.

22.

Morris, M. W. (1993). Culture and case: American and Chinese understandings of physical and social causality. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan.

23.

Morris, M. W., Nisbett, R. E., & Peng, K. (1994). Causal attribution across domains and cultures. In G. Lewis, D. Premack, & D. Sperber(Eds.), Causal understandings in cognition and culture. Oxford, England ; Oxford University Press.

24.

Morris, M. W., & Peng, K. (1994). Culture and cause: American and Chinese attributions for social and physical events. Journal of Personality and social Psychology, 67, 949-971.

25.

Norenzayan, A., & Nisbett, R.E. (1998). Social inference east and west. Unpublished manuscript, Ann Arbor.

26.

Pennington, N & Hastie, R., (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 189–206.

27.

Pepitone, A. (1987). The role of culture in theories of social psychology. In C. Kagitcibasi(Ed.), Growth and progress in cross-cultural psychology. Lisse, Netherlands : Ewets & Zeitlinger.

28.

Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. Advances in experimental social psychology, 10, 174-228.

29.

Shweder, R. A., & Bourne, E. (1984). Does the concept of the person vary cross-culturally? InR. A. Shweder & R. A. LeVine(Eds.), Culture theory : Essays on mind, self, and emotion. Cambridge, England : Cambridge University Press.

30.

Singelis, T. M., Triandis, H. C., Bhawuk, D. P. S., & Gelfand, M. J. (1995). Horizontal and vertical dimensions of individualism and collectivism: A theoretical and measurement refinement. Cross-Cultural Research, 29, 240-275.

31.

Terrance, C. A., Matheson, K., & Spanos, N. P. (2000). Effects of judicial instructions and case characteristics in a mock jury trial of battered women who kill. Law and Human Behavior, 24 (2), 207-229.

32.

Zebrowitz, L. A. (1990). Social perception. Pacific Grove, CA : Brooks/Cole.

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy