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!
container_end_page 1333
container_issue 6
container_start_page 1251
container_title The Georgetown law journal
container_volume 111
creator Bakhshay, Shirin
description 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
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_rmit_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_gale_incontextgauss_IOV_A768702914</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A768702914</galeid><informt_id>10.3316/agispt.20231012096863</informt_id><sourcerecordid>A768702914</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g354t-66a4fb47747377f438d510d2beb218eed7d8b103eb62dc079b6900fa982648533</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptzl1LwzAUBuBeKDin_6EgXghW8tUkvRxD3UDYzfQ2pO1pm7E2M0lF_71hU3QwAifk8Lw55yyZIIR5JlFBLpJL7zfxiSihk-R23UFaG-9tZXQwH5CGDqz7Sm2T7sbB-K6HIVwl543eerj-uafJ69Pjer7IXlbPy_nsJWtpzkLGuWZNyYRgggrRMCrrHKOalFASLAFqUcsyDoaSk7pCoih5gVCjC0k4kzml0-Tm8O_O2fcRfFAbO7ohjlRECpbnnDD-p1q9BWWGxganq974Ss0ElwKRArOoshOqhQGc3toBGhPbR_7hhI-nht5UJwN3R4FoAnyGVo_eq-Xq7dje_7Pl6M0APhZv2i74Q-SILw7c9SYo3Rq_C8qDdlW332zftq5VtTUKI0Up5r-MIEIxwgQVXHJKvwHwU5qg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2874556246</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The dissociative theory of punishment</title><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><creator>Bakhshay, Shirin</creator><creatorcontrib>Bakhshay, Shirin</creatorcontrib><description>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 approach to criminal justice policy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0016-8092</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: Georgetown University Law Center</publisher><subject>Criminal justice ; Criminal justice, Administration of ; Criminal law ; Criminal sentences ; Imprisonment ; Influence ; Mass incarceration ; Prisons ; Psychological aspects ; Psychology ; Punishment ; Racism ; Rehabilitation of criminals ; Restorative justice ; Sentences (Criminal procedure) ; Social aspects</subject><ispartof>The Georgetown law journal, 2023-06, Vol.111 (6), p.1251-1333</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2023 Georgetown University Law Center</rights><rights>Copyright Georgetown University Law Center Jun 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bakhshay, Shirin</creatorcontrib><title>The dissociative theory of punishment</title><title>The Georgetown law journal</title><description>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 approach to criminal justice policy.</description><subject>Criminal justice</subject><subject>Criminal justice, Administration of</subject><subject>Criminal law</subject><subject>Criminal sentences</subject><subject>Imprisonment</subject><subject>Influence</subject><subject>Mass incarceration</subject><subject>Prisons</subject><subject>Psychological aspects</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Punishment</subject><subject>Racism</subject><subject>Rehabilitation of criminals</subject><subject>Restorative justice</subject><subject>Sentences (Criminal procedure)</subject><subject>Social aspects</subject><issn>0016-8092</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>N95</sourceid><recordid>eNptzl1LwzAUBuBeKDin_6EgXghW8tUkvRxD3UDYzfQ2pO1pm7E2M0lF_71hU3QwAifk8Lw55yyZIIR5JlFBLpJL7zfxiSihk-R23UFaG-9tZXQwH5CGDqz7Sm2T7sbB-K6HIVwl543eerj-uafJ69Pjer7IXlbPy_nsJWtpzkLGuWZNyYRgggrRMCrrHKOalFASLAFqUcsyDoaSk7pCoih5gVCjC0k4kzml0-Tm8O_O2fcRfFAbO7ohjlRECpbnnDD-p1q9BWWGxganq974Ss0ElwKRArOoshOqhQGc3toBGhPbR_7hhI-nht5UJwN3R4FoAnyGVo_eq-Xq7dje_7Pl6M0APhZv2i74Q-SILw7c9SYo3Rq_C8qDdlW332zftq5VtTUKI0Up5r-MIEIxwgQVXHJKvwHwU5qg</recordid><startdate>20230601</startdate><enddate>20230601</enddate><creator>Bakhshay, Shirin</creator><general>Georgetown University Law Center</general><scope>N95</scope><scope>XI7</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ILT</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20230601</creationdate><title>The dissociative theory of punishment</title><author>Bakhshay, Shirin</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g354t-66a4fb47747377f438d510d2beb218eed7d8b103eb62dc079b6900fa982648533</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Criminal justice</topic><topic>Criminal justice, Administration of</topic><topic>Criminal law</topic><topic>Criminal sentences</topic><topic>Imprisonment</topic><topic>Influence</topic><topic>Mass incarceration</topic><topic>Prisons</topic><topic>Psychological aspects</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Punishment</topic><topic>Racism</topic><topic>Rehabilitation of criminals</topic><topic>Restorative justice</topic><topic>Sentences (Criminal procedure)</topic><topic>Social aspects</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bakhshay, Shirin</creatorcontrib><collection>Gale Business: Insights</collection><collection>Business Insights: Essentials</collection><collection>Gale in Context : Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale OneFile: LegalTrac</collection><jtitle>The Georgetown law journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bakhshay, Shirin</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The dissociative theory of punishment</atitle><jtitle>The Georgetown law journal</jtitle><date>2023-06-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>111</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1251</spage><epage>1333</epage><pages>1251-1333</pages><issn>0016-8092</issn><abstract>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 approach to criminal justice policy.</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>Georgetown University Law Center</pub><tpages>83</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0016-8092
ispartof The Georgetown law journal, 2023-06, Vol.111 (6), p.1251-1333
issn 0016-8092
language eng
recordid cdi_gale_incontextgauss_IOV_A768702914
source EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; HeinOnline Law Journal Library
subjects Criminal justice
Criminal justice, Administration of
Criminal law
Criminal sentences
Imprisonment
Influence
Mass incarceration
Prisons
Psychological aspects
Psychology
Punishment
Racism
Rehabilitation of criminals
Restorative justice
Sentences (Criminal procedure)
Social aspects
title The dissociative theory of punishment
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T23%3A12%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_rmit_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20dissociative%20theory%20of%20punishment&rft.jtitle=The%20Georgetown%20law%20journal&rft.au=Bakhshay,%20Shirin&rft.date=2023-06-01&rft.volume=111&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1251&rft.epage=1333&rft.pages=1251-1333&rft.issn=0016-8092&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cgale_rmit_%3EA768702914%3C/gale_rmit_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2874556246&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A768702914&rft_informt_id=10.3316/agispt.20231012096863&rfr_iscdi=true