http://dx.doi.org/10.6129/CJP.2010.5203.04
Chinese Journal of Psychology 2010, Vol.52, No.3, 287-308
陳建安（中原大學心理學系暨心理科學研究中心）
摘要
本研究目的是要了解犯罪者的認知思考特徵與犯罪經驗間的對應連結關係。目前，犯罪心理學研究仍缺乏以社會認知理論來解釋為什麼有些人會傾向特定類型之犯罪行為，但較不會有其他類型之犯行。本研究以290位在監男性成年犯為研究對象，在多元比較設計的架構下，針對吸毒、竊盜、性侵害及暴力行為之犯罪者進行社會認知評價之交叉比較分析。依據研究參與者之犯罪史自陳報告，研究者個別計算他們在四種類型犯行上的「犯罪特定性指標」（crime specialism index, CSI），以作為本研究之自變項。依變項則為犯人之犯罪自我認同、認知信念、規範信念、道德領域及犯罪情境之判斷。研究結果顯示，因犯罪者個人特殊經驗與認知之互動影響，成年犯有三種自利性認知評價傾向，包括認同或支持自己的犯行、否認傷害，但卻厭惡他類犯罪。本研究確認了社會認知評價與犯罪經驗的對應連結關係，且有一犯罪主題跨不同認知面向的系統性社會認知評價偏誤；而犯罪者也可能因犯罪經驗的增加，而逐漸陷入特定犯罪認知思考模式的困境。
關鍵詞：犯罪特定性指標、犯罪類型、社會認知評價、道德領域判斷
The Relationship between Social Cognition Evaluations and Crime Experiences: A Comparative Study on Different Types of Offending Behavior
Chien-An Chen（Department of Psychology and Research Centre for Psychological Science, Chung Yuan Christian University）
Abstract
The reason why some offenders only engage in specific pattern of offences but not others remains incompletely answered. There is a lack of social-cognitive perspective theory designated to explain crime choice. The different cognitive beliefs about offending exhibited by offenders were tapped within a multi-manners research framework. Offenders were asked to cross-assess or compare their own and three other crime types (drug abuse, theft, sexual, and violent) in terms of the crime self-identity, normative beliefs, cognitive beliefs, crime episode judgment, and moral domain assignment. The question addressed in this paper concerns the extent to which beliefs and social knowledge about offending characterize the four different characteristic types of offending. Two hundred and ninety adult male prisoners (mean age = 34.0 years) provided self-reported criminal histories. From these a crime specialism index (CSI) indicative of the proportion of offences of each type was calculated for each offender. Results showed all cognitive variables were entered as predictors, but the number of the variables included in crime regression models varied from one to another. Drug offence CSI was amongst the best crime type to be predicted by the social cognition variables investigated. This may be explained by the fact that drug CSI accounted for 42% of total averaged CSI. The more intensive an offender’s involvement in a specific pattern of crime the more likely were they to evaluate this type of crime more positively, legitimately and less moral concerns involved than any of the other crime types concerned. In this way, cognitive representations reinforce an offender’s specific pattern of criminal acts while also may insulate them from pressures towards other criminal activities. Evidence is presented that offenders’ social knowledge development is consolidated around crime themes corresponding to the predominant crime engaged. It is thus suggested that offenders may socio-cognitively adhere to specific patterns of criminal thinking. To maximize their benefits and maintain the cognitive equilibrium, a self-serving (denying crime consequences and legitimating their own offending) but other-negating thinking inclination emerged in offenders’ social knowledge. Therefore, the habitual offending behavior may be the function of reciprocity between crime cognitions and repeated crime engagements. Future research should explore in greater depth the specificity and versatility of social cognitive reasoning in this context. Also, more offenders’ idiographic viewpoint regarding the factors which intervene between beliefs about what is good and good behavior need to be understood better.
Keywords: crime specialism index (CSI), crime types, moral domain assignment, socio-cognitive evaluation
