法官司法行为的话语心理学研究 内容简介

法官决策话语主要有调节类、征询类、表征类和定性类等四种。但每种话语行为都有多种不同的实现形式。这表明，法官行为是结构性与动态性的矛盾统一。从法官认同方面，我们发现，法官这些司法话语行为的差异性可从法官认同的三个层面(即话语性、情景性和转移性)得到解释。基于法官的认同取向，我们发现法官决策行为差异可大体表现在三个方面：首先。法官在司法过程中是以程序为知名品牌还是以实体内容为知名品牌。其次、法官在人际定位上是倾向于型还是友好型。很后、法官在认知取向上是采用范畴化模式还是叙事模式。这些差异不是法官固有角色特征的属性，而是法官在司法过程中存在状态的具体关切体现。基于本研究的分析结果，本文很后提出司法公正是一种话语建构的实体，存在于日常司法话语之中。司法行为的核心是司法过程中法官的关切状态。法官司法行为研究的本质就是揭示由法官认同所体现的法官关切状态。司法改革需要使法官的“纯真”知识合法化。解决这个问题的方法是提高法官的批判性话语意识。

法官司法行为的话语心理学研究 目录

Chapter 1 Introduction1．1 Background to the Study1．2 Purpose of the Study1．3 Theoretical Assumptions of the Study1．4 Research QuestionsChapter 2 Literature Review2．1 Judges' Institutional Roles2．1．1 Judges' Varying Roles Under Different Judicial Systems2．1．2 Jurisprudential Definitions of Judges' Role2．1．3 Judge under China's Constitution2．2 Judicial Behavior Research2．2．1 Cognitive-psychological Approach to Judicial Behavior2．2．2 Sociological Approach to Judicial Behavior2．2．3 The Discursive Turn in Judicial Behavior Research2．3 Discursive Psychology2．3．1 Accounts of Course of Action2．3．2 Accounts of Mind2．3．3 Accounts of Identity2．4 SummaryChapter 3 Theoretical Framework and Method3．1 Respecifying Judicial Behavior3．2 Concept and Assumption3．2．1 Discourse3．2．2 Discursive Action Model3．3 Theories of Discursive Actions3．3．1 Speech Act Theory3．3．2 Exchange Structure Theory3．3．3 Linguistic Anthropology3．4 A Theoretical Framework3．4．1 Characterizing Discursive Actions3．4．2 Identifying Identity3．4．3 Configurating Judicial Discourse Order3．5 Method3．5．1 Dataset3．5．2 Data AnalysisChapter 4 Discursive Enactment of Judges' Judicial Behavior4．1 Introduction4．2 Framing Judicial Trial4．3 Judges' Discursive Actions4．3．1 Coordinative4．3．2 Inquisitive4．3．3 Representative4．3．4 Attributive4．4 SummaryChapter 5 Judges' Identity Performance in Discursive Actions5．1 Introduction5．2 Self-identifying5．3 Discourse Identities5．3．1 Initiator5．3．2 Evaluator5．4 Situated Identities5．4．1 Procedure Organizer5．4．2 Fact Investigator5．4．3 Order Maker5．5 Transportable Identities5．5．1 Justice Doer5．5．2 Officialdom5．5．3 Social Member5．6 SummaryChapter 6 The Ontology of Judicial Behavior6．1 Introduction6．2 Disparity in JJB6．2．1 Procedure-oriented vs．Substance-oriented6．2．2 Authority vs．Solidarity6．2．3 Paradigmatic vs．Narrative6．3 The Ontological Structure for JJB6．3．1 Heideggerian Theory of Being6．3．2 Judges' Caring and Knowing6．3．3 SummaryChapter 7 Conclusion7．1 Introduction7．2 Summary of the Research7．3 Major Findings7．3．1 Discursive Characterization of Judicial Behavior7．3．2 Judges' Epistemological Positioning7．3．3 An Ontological Account of JJB7．4 Implications7．4．1 Discursive Construction of Justice7．4．2 Possibility for Judicial Reform7．4．3 Critical Discourse Awareness7．5 Limitations and Suggestions for Further ResearchReferencesAppendices

法官司法行为的话语心理学研究 节选

　　《江西师范大学外国语言文学学术文库：法官司法行为的话语心理学研究（英文版）》：　　According to Gottfredson （1987） ， rationality in criminal justice can notbe achieved for three reasons.Firstly， the specific objectives of legalapparatus can not be rendered with adequate operational definitions forimplementation. Secondly， it is not likely to identify or adequately describe allthe decisional options at each step. Thirdly， the information necessary forrational decision making is often insufficient. These three factors can severelyundermine the validity of the CPA approach. As Segal & Spaeth （2002）point out， all the rationality-based models only represent reality in a　　simplified way and ignore certain aspects of reality. The explanations provided in these models are reductionist in that the context and meaning of judicial behavior are idealized. We can not expect any rational models to address the　　richness and complexity of judicial reality，　　Besides rationality， JJB research also needs to address the irrationality and nonrationality inherent in judges' behavior （Back， 1961） . We need to make allowance for the errors judges commit， the poor analysis judge make and the inappropriate heuristics judges use.That is， the rationality-based CPA shall be complemented with theories that incorporate judges' personal values， thinking patterns， skills and habits as well as the limited information available. Back （1961： 16） points out that "the rational model derives the decision from the structure of the situation while the irrational model derives it from the tructure of the person".This understanding of JJB has propelled JJB researchers to shift their attention to' the dynamics of the judicial context and the social constraints.　　2.2.2 Sociological Approach to Judicial Behavior　　In modem psychology， as the conduit metaphor of human cognition has become an increasingly less satisfactory model， there emerges a call for a humanistic view of psychology （Fuchs & Milar， 2003） .Similarly，judicial behavior research has found that only verv rare situations can meet the canonical cognitive models. More often than not， judicial behavior is unprogrammed， with no fixed pattems to follow.Judges have to deal with situations which are novel，unstructured and consequential.This observation engendered the sociolegal work （Black， 1997） in JJB research. Different from the traditional approaches which build their theorizations on cognitive psychology， this sociological approach focuses on the "interactive decisions" （Raiffa， 1994） .It is interested in the real， complex，ill-defined world and aims to account for the differences in the situation， the person and the decision.　　Following this sociological perspective， judicial behavior research shall be rooted in empirical analysis and seek explanations for the actual judicial behaviors of individuals or groups of people by describing them as their personal or institutional life （Back， 1961） .It shall turn to "look at the many and varied practice and behaviors we call 'legal' and seek， in a somewhat piecemeal way， to build our understanding of law from below in a gradual and accumulative way" （Murphy & Coleman 1990： 35）.In this line， Baum （2006） ， for example， points out that we shall pay attention to judges' response to their audience， for it is primarily judges' desire to be liked and respected that influences their judicial behavior.　　……

 1/2    1 2 下一页 尾页

法律 法的理论

在线阅读