바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

ISSN : 1229-0653

Article Contents

Prev
e-Submission

Vol.27 No.1
Citation Share

Understanding Public Figure: Punishment and Forgiveness on an Illegal Behavior

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2013, v.27 no.1, pp.67-84
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2013.27.1.005



& (2013). Understanding Public Figure: Punishment and Forgiveness on an Illegal Behavior. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 27(1), 67-84, https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2013.27.1.005
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

This study investigated the general concept of public figure and how illegal acts of public figure influence punishment and forgiveness evaluation. In Experiment 1, participants defined public figure as a person with recognition and who can exert influence on other people. Also, participants perceived that public figure should have following characteristics: integrity, honesty and morality. In Experiment Ⅱ, participants were asked to measure what type of characteristics public figure currently have and what characteristics public figures are expected to have. The results indicated that there were a number of differences between current characteristics and the characteristics that they are expected to have, except recognizability and physical apparence. Significant differences were observed on integrity, morality and following the norm, and participants perceived that public figures should have less economic power, social status, and influence on the society. Experiment Ⅲ measured what types of occupations public figure would have. The results indicated that public officials, entertainers were considered as public figures. Experiment IV evaluated punishment and forgiveness on an illegal action committed by public figures. The result indicated that there was a significant difference on evaluation of punishment, criticism, self-reflection between a public figure and an ordinary person. The implications of the current study were discussed.

keywords
공인(公人), 공인의 위법행위, 처벌판단, 비난, 용서, public figure, illegal behavior, punitive judgement, criticism, forgiveness

Reference

1.

김동주 (2001). 명예훼손 행위에 있어서 미국의 판례에서 형성된 소위 “공적인물” 개념의 우리 판례에의 반영. 民事法硏究, 9, 53-77.

2.

뉴스엔 (2011. 9. 9). 강호동 은퇴 선언에 동정론 꿈틀 “죄질에 비해 응징 과해”. http://www. newsen.com/news_view.php?uid=201109091847361001

3.

문재완 (2002). 公人에 대한 名譽毁損. 法曹, 8(551), 210-254.

4.

문재완 (2004). 공인에 관한 최근 명예훼손 법리의 비교연구. 언론중재, 24(1), 4-21.

5.

아시아경제 (2012. 4. 13). 공지영 허위사실 유포…“성급했다” 빈축. http://view.asiae.co.kr/ news/view.htm?idxno=2012041215050463926&nvr=Y

6.

엑스포츠뉴스 (2012. 7. 5). 두산 고창성 SNS, KIA-두산 갈등 불 지피기? http://xportsnews. hankyung.com/?ac=article_view&entry_id=241228

7.

윤성옥 (2007). 공인의 미디어 소송 특징과 국내 판결 경향에 관한 연구. 한국언론정보학보, 40, 150-191.

8.

이재진 (1999). 명예훼손법상의 공인과 언론에 나타난 공인. 언론과 사회, 10(2), 73-110.

9.

이재진 (2003). 방송에서의 ‘공인’의 의미에 대한 법제론적 고찰: 명예훼손 관련 판례 분석을 중심으로. 미디어경제와 문화, 1(1), 107-144.

10.

임유진 (1998). 언론보도로 인한 개인의 명예훼손 판례 분석: 공인에 대한 보도의 한계는 어디인가?. 이화여자대학교 대학원 석사논문.

11.

차용범 (2001). 공인의 명예훼손에 대한 사법적 논의의 한계. 한국언론학보, 45(2), 387-421.

12.

차용범 (2002). 공인의 명예훼손에 대한 판결기준의 변화 추세 판례분석을 중심으로. 한국언론학보, 46(3), 414-445.

13.

최승혁, 김범준, 김시업 (1997). 화이트칼라 범죄에 대한 처벌철학과 양형판단. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 23(3), 1-17.

14.

최지웅 (2003). 명예훼손 판례분석을 통한 공인에 대한 개념연구. 경성대학교 대학원 석사논문.

15.

한국경제 (2011. 9. 23). 탈세 연예인 퇴출돼야 할까요. http://www.hankyung.com/news/app/ newsview.php?aid=2011092188061

16.

Barnett, N. J., & Feild, H. S. (1978). Character of the defendant and length of sentence in rape and burglary crime. Journal of Social Psychology, 104, 271-277.

17.

Esqueda, C. W., Espinoza, R. K. E., & Culhane, S. E. (2008). The effects of ethnicity, SES, and crime status on juror decision making: A cross-cultural examination of European American and Mexican American mock jurors. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 30(2), 181-199.

18.

Freeman, N. J. (2006). Socioeconomic status and belief in a just world: Sentencing of criminal defendants. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(10), 2379-2394.

19.

Gleason, J. M., & Harris, V. A. (1975). Race, socio-economic status, and perceived similarity as determinants of judgements by simulated jurors. Social Behavior and Personality, 3, 175-180.

20.

Hoffman, E. (1981). Social class correlates or perceived offender typicality. Psychological Reports, 49, 347-350.

21.

Knight, J. L., Giuliano, T. A., & Sanchez-Ross, M. G. (2001). Famous or infamous? The influence of celebrity status and race on perceptions of responsibility for rape. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 23(3), 183-190.

22.

Mazzella, R., & Feingold, A. (1994). The effects of physical atrractiveness, race, socioeconomic status, and gender of defendants and victimes on judgments of mock jurors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24(15), 1315 -1344.

23.

Osborne, Y. H., & Rappaport, N. B. (1985). Sentencing severity with mock jurors: Predictive validity of three categories. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 3, 467-473.

24.

Shaw, J. I., & Skolnick, P. (1996). When is defendant status a shield or a liability? Clarification and extension. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 431-442.

25.

Steblay, N. M., Besirevic, J., Fulero S. M., & Jimenez-Lorente, B. (1999). The effects of pretrial publicity on juror verdicts: A meta-analytic review. Law and Human Behavior, 23(2), 219-235.

26.

Studebaker C. A., & Penrod, S. D. (2005). Pretrial Publicity and Its Influence on Juror Decision Making. In N. Brewer & K. D. Williams(Eds.), Psychology And Law: An Empirical Perspective (pp. 254-275). New York: Guilford Press.

27.

Sutherland, E. H. (1940). White-collar criminality. American Sociological Review, 5(1), 1-12.

28.

Sutherland, E. H. (1945). Is “white collar crime” crime? American Sociological Review, 10(2), 132 -139.

29.

Sutherland, E. H. (1983). White collar crime: The uncut version. CT: Yale University Press.

30.

Wong, M., Goodboy, A. K., Murtagh, M. P., Hackney, A. A., & McCutcheon, L. E. (2010). Are celebrities Charged with murder likely to be acquitted? North American Journal of Psychology, 23(3), 625-636.

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy