The dissociative theory of punishment

The American public has complex views on criminal punishment. They are driven primarily by retributive motivations. But they have other justice considerations, such as restoration and rehabilitation, that can be activated in different ways. Laypersons are also motivated to psychologically distance a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Georgetown law journal 2023-06, Vol.111 (6), p.1251-1333
1. Verfasser: Bakhshay, Shirin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The American public has complex views on criminal punishment. They are driven primarily by retributive motivations. But they have other justice considerations, such as restoration and rehabilitation, that can be activated in different ways. Laypersons are also motivated to psychologically distance and dissociate from those they perceive to be criminal "others" and to see punishment itself as a kind of dissociation, embodied by the prison form. The psychological processes that produce these beliefs lead to an insistence on prison as a necessary criminal justice outcome, despite reservations about its effectiveness and concerns about the state of mass incarceration and punitive penal policy more generally. This article builds on the psychology of punishment literature to offer a deeper understanding of the dissociative theory of punishment and how it produces the belief in the necessity of prison. Drawing on original, qualitative focus group data and analysis, this article identifies the specific psychological mechanisms that motivate dissociation, explains the role of the belief in retributive justice as part of this process, and offers nuanced insights into the contours of the dissociative theory and the way people psychologically reason about criminal punishment. Identifying the components of the dissociative process and those beliefs that are malleable has important practical and normative implications. It also suggests the possibility of a different approach to criminal punishment. Leveraging insights from focus group analysis as well as original experimental work, this article suggests a normative approach - restorative punishment - that is more responsive to lay psychology. This article discusses strategies consistent with this approach that may be effective in disrupting dissociation and building support for alternatives to incarceration, including bridging connections with criminal actors, reframing alternatives to incarceration in ways that better align with the retributive motivations of the public, and activating other conceptions of justice that are not well served by the imposition of a prison sentence. It then explores two specific criminal justice policies through this normative lens - restorative justice diversion and second look resentencing - and discusses their psychological appeal. This article ends by offering an empirical agenda to test the mechanisms that drive dissociation and explores the potential for a restorative punishment appro
ISSN:0016-8092