پژوهشهای حقوقی

پژوهشهای حقوقی

اثر بازدارندگی در نظریه‌های کنش وضعیتی و سرکشی و مقایسه آن با نظریه بازدارندگی

نوع مقاله : علمی- پژوهشی

نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکترای حقوق کیفری و جرم‌شناسی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، واحد شیراز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، شیراز، ایران.
2 استادیار، گروه حقوق، دانشکده علوم انسانی، واحد شیراز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، شیراز، ایران.
چکیده
مروری بر ادبیات جرم‌شناسی در چند دهه اخیر نشان‌دهنده آن است که برخی از مفاهیم پذیرفته‌شده در جرم‌شناسی با تحولات نظری و مفهومی گسترده‌ای روبه‌رو  بوده‌اند. بازدارندگی یکی از مهم‌ترین مفاهیمی است که در بستر تحول مفاهیم جرم‌شناسی قرار گرفته و پیرامون آن نظریه‌های گوناگونی در جرم‌شناسی شکل گرفته است. در این پژوهش با استفاده از روش کتابخانه‌ای ـ تحلیلی به بازدارندگی در نظریه کنش وضعیتی و سرکشی و مقایسه آن با نظریه بازدارندگی پرداخت شده است. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان داد که گرچه در نظریه بازدارندگی تمام افراد همواره در حال انتخاب بین گزینه‌های مجرمانه و غیرمجرمانه بوده و بنابراین در معرض اثر بازدارندگی قرار دارند، اما در نظریه کنش وضعیتی تنها افرادی که دارای سطح اخلاقی متوسط هستند از تحلیل هزینه ـ فایده استفاده کرده و بنابراین در معرض بازدارندگی قرار دارند. در نظریه سرکشی نیز بر خلاف نظریه‌های بازدارندگی و کنش وضعیتی، مکانیسم بازدارندگی از طریق شرمساری بر افراد اثر می‌گذارد؛ بنابراین مجازات تنها در صورتی می‌تواند دارای اثر بازدارندگی باشد که فرد در نتیجه واکنش کیفری دچار شرمساری شود. البته در نظریه سرکشی علاوه بر شرمساری، وجود پیوندهای قوی اجتماعی و نیز مشروع دانستن عامل تحمیل‌کننده واکنش کیفری نیز بر بازدارندگی مؤثر است. در پایان می‌توان گفت که نظریه‌های کنش وضعیتی و سرکشی عمومیت اثر بازدارندگی بر تمام افراد را رد کرده‌اند. همچنین در نظریه سرکشی، شرمساری به‌جای تحلیل هزینه ـ فایده به‌عنوان مبانی تأثیر بازدارندگی معرفی شده است.
کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله English

The Effect of Deterrence in the Theories of Situational Action and Defiance and Comparing It with the Theory of Deterrence

نویسندگان English

azadeh dehghanfar 1
amir Paknahad 2
Amir Irvanian 2
1 PhD Student in Criminal Law and Criminology, Faculty of Humanities, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Humanities, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran.
چکیده English

A criminology literature in recent decades shows that some accepted concepts in criminology have faced extensive theoretical and conceptual changes. Deterrence is one of the most important concepts that has been placed in the evolution of criminology concepts and various theories in criminology have been formed around it. In this research, using the library-analytical method, deterrence in the theory of situational action and defiance has been discussed and compared with the theory of deterrence. The findings of the research showed that although in the theory of deterrence, all people are always choosing between criminal and non-criminal options and are therefore subject to the effect of deterrence, but in the theory of situational action, only people who have an average moral level use cost-benefit analysis and therefore they are subject to deterrence. In the theory of defiance, unlike the theories of deterrence and situational action, the mechanism of deterrence affects people through shame. Therefore, punishment can only have a deterrent effect if the person is embarrassed as a result of the criminal reaction. Of course, in the theory of defiance, in addition to shame, the existence of strong social ties and the legitimacy of the factor imposing a criminal reaction are also effective on deterrence. In the end, it can be said that the theories of situational action and defiance have rejected the generality of the deterrent effect on all people. Also, in the theory of defiance, shame has been introduced as the basis of deterrence instead of cost-benefit analysis.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Situational action theory
Defiance theory
Deterrence theory
Punishment
Criminology
الف) منابع فارسی
- پاک‌نهاد، امیر. دانشنامه جرم‌شناسی نظری. ویرایش اول. تهران: نشر میزان، 1400.
- طویلی، مهدی، مهدی شیداییان، سیدمحمود میرخلیلی و شهرداد دارابی. «تحلیل نسبت مصلحت‌سنجی تعقیب کیفری با نظم عمومی و امنیت اجتماعی». مطالعات و تحقیقات اجتماعی در ایران، 10، 37(1400)، 79-116.
Doi: 10.22059/jisr.2021.310574.1127
- نجفی ابرندآبادی، علی‌حسین. تقریرات درس جرم‌شناسی (جرم‌شناسی تجربی). تهران: بی‌نا، 1372.
ب) منابع انگلیسی

- Apel, Robert. “Sanctions, perceptions, and crime: Implications for criminal deterrence”. Journal of quantitative criminology, 29, (2013), 67-101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-012-9170-1
- Baharom, A. H. and Muzafar Shah Habibullah. “Crime and income inequality: The case of Malaysia”, Journal of Politics and Law, 2, (2009), 55-70.
- Bates, Lyndel and Levi Anderson. “Young drivers, deterrence theory, and punishment avoidance: a qualitative exploration”. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 15, 2(2021), 784-797. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paz075
- Becker, Gary S. “Crime and punishment: An economic approach”. Journal of Political Economy, 76, 2(1968), 169-217. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1830482
- Bouffard, Leana A. and Lawrence W. Sherman. “Defiance theory”. In: Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice. New York: Springer, 2014, 925-932. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_66
- Brame, Robert and Ray Paternoster. “Defiance theory”. In: The Encyclopedia of Theoretical Criminology. edited by J. Mitchell Miller. West Sussex, UK: Wiley Blackwell, 2014, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118517390.wbetc191
- Broekhof, Evelien, Marieke GN Bos and Carolien Rieffe. “The roles of shame and guilt in the development of aggression in adolescents with and without hearing loss”. Research on child and adolescent psychopathology, 49, (2021), 891-904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-021-00769-1
- Brownfield, David. “A defiance theory of sanctions and gang membership”. Journal of Gang Research, 13, 4(2005), 31-43.
- Bruinsma, Gerben and David Weisburd. Encyclopedia of criminology and criminal justice. New York: Springer, 2014.
- Cochran, John K. “Moral propensity, setting, and choice: A partial test of situational action theory”. Deviant Behavior, 37, (2016), 811-823.
- Cohen, Alma and Crystal S. Yang. “Judicial politics and sentencing decisions”. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 11, (2019), 160-91.
- Daniels, Michael A. and Sandra L. Robinson. “The shame of it all: A review of shame in organizational life”. Journal of Management, 45, 1(2019), 2448-2473. Doi:10.1177/0149206318817604
- Detotto, Claudio and Manuela Pulina. “Assessing substitution and complementary effects amongst crime typologies”. European journal on criminal policy and research, 19, (2013), 309-332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-013-9196-4
 - Flores-Macías, Gustavo and Mariano Sánchez-Talanquer. “Building the modern state in developing countries: Perceptions of public safety and (un) willingness to pay taxes in Mexico”. Politics & Society, 48, (2020), 423-451.
- Friesen, Lana. “Certainty of punishment versus severity of punishment: An experimental investigation”. Southern Economic Journal, 79, 2(2012), 399-421. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41638882
- Garner, Joel H., Christopher D. Maxwell and Jina Lee. “The specific deterrent effects of criminal sanctions for intimate partner violence: A meta-analysis”. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 111, 1(2021), 227-271. https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol111/iss1/4
- Gecas, Viktor. “Contexts of socialization”. In: Social psychology. New York: Routledge, 2017.
- Gibbs, Jack P. “Crime, punishment, and deterrence”. The Southwestern Social Science Quarterly, (1968), 515-530.
- Grusec, Joan E. “Socialization processes in the family: Social and emotional development”. Annual review of psychology, 62, (2011), 243-269. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.121208.131650
- Gul, Serdar. “An evaluation of rational choice theory in criminology”, Girne American University Journal of Sociology and Applied Science, 4, (2009), 36-44.
- Harris, Nathan. “Shame, ethical identity and conformity: Lessons from research on the psychology of social influence”. In: Emotions, crime and justice. Susanne Karstedt, Ian Loader and Heather Strang. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2011.
- Hillebrandt, Annika and Laurie J. Barclay. “How cheating undermines the perceived value of justice in the workplace: The mediating effect of shame”. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105, 10(2020), 1164-1180. Doi: 10.1037/apl0000485
- Hirschi, Travis. Causes of delinquency. New Brunswick: Transaction publishers, 2002.
- Huang, Ru and Nan Liang. “The influence of familiarity with Information Technology on the effects of deterrence”. Current Psychology, 42, 33(2023), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03857-7
- Jacob, Anupama. “Economic theories of crime and delinquency”. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 21, (2011), 270-283. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2011.564951
- Jacques, Scott. “Bentham, Not Epicurus: The Relevance of Pleasure to Studies of Drug-Involved Pain”. Journal of Drug Issues, 49, 1(2019), 118-138. https://doi.org/10.21428/cb6ab371.30868967
- Johnson, Ben. Do Criminal Laws Deter Crime?: Deterrence Theory in Criminal Justice Policy: A Primer. St. Paul, MN: MN House Research, 2019.
- Klein, Jennifer L., Danielle Tolson and Cathy Collins. “Lamenting the list: A partial test of Sherman’s defiance theory as applied to female sex offenders”. Contemporary Justice Review, 17, 3(2014), 326-345. https://doi.org/10.1080/10282580.2014.944798
- Ladegaard, Isak. “We know where you are, what you are doing and we will catch you: Testing deterrence theory in digital drug markets”. The British Journal of Criminology, 58, 2(2018), 414-433. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azx021
- Maddox, Samuel J. and Ronald J. Prinz. “School bonding in children and adolescents: Conceptualization, assessment, and associated variables”. Clinical child and family psychology review, 6, (2003), 31-49. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022214022478
- Megens, Kim C.I.M. and Frank M. Weerman. “The social transmission of delinquency: Effects of peer attitudes and behavior revisited”. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 49, 3(2012), 420-443. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427811408432
- Mendes, Silvia M. “Certainty, severity, and their relative deterrent effects: Questioning the implications of the role of risk in criminal deterrence policy”. Policy Studies Journal, 32, 1(2004), 59-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0190-292X.2004.00053.x
- Perry, Gali, Per-Olof H. Wikström and Gabriela D. Roman. “Differentiating right-wing extremism from potential for violent extremism: The role of criminogenic exposure”. International journal of developmental science, 12, (2018), 103-113.
- Pesta, Racheal. “School punishment, deterrence, and race: A partial test of defiance theory”. Crime & Delinquency, 68, 3(2022), 463-494. https://doi.org/10.1177/00111287211005396
- Quackenbush, Stephen L. “Deterrence theory: where do we stand?”. Review of International Studies, 37, 2(2011), 741-762. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210510000896
- Robinson, Paul H. “The role of deterrence in the formulation of criminal law rules: At its worst when doing its best”. The Georgetown law journal, 91, (2002), 949-1002. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/56
- Romero, Angel David Ramirez, Héctor Daniel Martínez Duarte and Jennifer Katherine Rincón Amaya. “Police and judicial efficiency in Colombia”. Panorama Económico, 29, (2021), 206-223.
- Sheikh, Sana and Ronnie Janoff-Bulman. “The “should” and “should nots” of moral emotions: A self-regulatory perspective on shame and guilt”. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 2(2010), 213-224.
- Sherman, Lawrence W. “Defiance theory”. In: Encyclopedia of Criminological Theory. London: Sage Publications, 2003, 286-293. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412959193.n230
- Sherman, Lawrence W. “Defiance, compliance and consilience: A general theory of criminology”. In: The SAGE Handbook of Criminological Theory. LA: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2010, 360-390. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446200926.n20
- Sherman, Lawrence W. “Defiance, Deterrence, and Irrelevance: A Theory of the Criminal Sanction”. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30, 4(1993), 445-473. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427893030004006
- Stafford, Mark C. and Mark Warr. “A reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence”. Journal of research in crime and delinquency, 30, (1993), 123-135.
- Stein, Janice Gross and Ron Levi. “Testing Deterrence by Denial: Experimental Results from Criminology”. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 46, 1(2023), 101-121. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2020.1777710
- Sugarman, David. “Hart interviewed: HLA Hart in conversation with David Sugarman”. Journal of Law and Society, 32, 2(2005), 267-293. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3557228
- Taylor, Ian. “The political economy of crime”. in: Crime, Inequality and the State. edited by Mary E. Vogel. New York: Routledge, 2007, 353-365. 
- Van Doormaal, Nick, Stijn Ruiter and Andrew M. Lemieux. “Corruption and the shadow of the future: A generalization of an ABM with repeated interactions”. In: Agent-Based Modelling for Criminological Theory Testing and Development. edited by Charlotte Gerritsen and Henk Elffers. New York: Routledge, 2021, 167-186. Doi:10.4324/9780429277177-7
- Wan, Wai-Yen, Steve Moffatt, Craig Jones and Don Weatherburn. “Effect of Arrest and Imprisonment on Crime”. NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 158(2012), 1-20. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/30679681.pdf
- Wikström, Per-Olaf H., Kyle Treiber and Beth Hardie. “Examining the role of the environment in crime causation: Small-area community surveys and space-time budgets”. The SAGE handbook of criminological research methods, (2012), 111-127. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446268285.n8
- Wikström, Per-Olof and Kyle Treiber. “The Dynamics of Change”. In: The Oxford handbook of developmental and life-course criminology. New York: Oxford University Press, 2019.
- Wikström, Per-Olof H. “Explaining crime and criminal careers: The DEA model of situational action theory”. Journal of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology, 6, (2020), 188-203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40865-019-00116-5
- Wikström, Per-Olof H. “Explaining crime as moral actions”. In: Handbook of the Sociology of Morality. Hitlin, S., Vaisey, S. (eds). New York: Springer, 2010, 211-239. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6896-8_12
- Wikström, Per-Olof H. “Individuals, settings, and acts of crime: Situational mechanisms and the explanation of crime”. In: The explanation of crime: Context, mechanisms and development. Wikström P-OH, Sampson RJ, eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, 61-107. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511489341.004
- Wikström, Per-Olof H. “Situational Action Theory: A general, dynamic and mechanism-based theory of crime and its causes”. Handbook on Crime and Deviance, (2019), 259-281. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20779-3_14
- Wikström, Per‐Olof H. “Why crime happens: A situational action theory”. Analytical sociology, (2014), 71-94. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118762707.ch03
- Wikström, Per-Olof H. and Clemens Kroneberg. “Analytic criminology: Mechanisms and methods in the explanation of crime and its causes”. Annual Review of Criminology, 5, (2022), 179-203. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-030920-091320
- Wikström, Per‐Olof H. and Noémie Bouhana. “Analyzing radicalization and terrorism: A situational action theory”. In: The handbook of the criminology of terrorism. Gary LaFree, Joshua D. Freilich. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2016, 175-186.
- Wikström, Per-Olof H. and Robert Svensson. “When does self-control matter? The interaction between morality and self-control in crime causation”. European Journal of Criminology, 7, 5(2010), 395-410. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370810372132
- Wikström, Per-Olof H., Dietrich Oberwittler, Kyle Treiber and Beth Hardie. Breaking rules: The social and situational dynamics of young people’s urban crime. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.
- Witte, Ann Dryden and Robert Witt. “Crime Causation: Economic Theories”. In Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice. New York: Macmillan Reference, 2002, 302-306.
- Zimring, Franklin E., Gordon Hawkins and James Vorenberg. Deterrence: The legal threat in crime control. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973, 345-369.