掃一掃
關注中圖網
官方微博
本類五星書更多>
-
>
法律的悖論(簽章版)
-
>
中華人民共和國憲法
-
>
中華人民共和國勞動法
-
>
私人財富保護、傳承與工具
-
>
再審洞穴奇案
-
>
法醫追兇:破譯犯罪現場的156個冷知識
-
>
法醫追兇:偵破罪案的214個冷知識
法官司法行為的話語心理學研究 版權信息
- ISBN：9787520316484
- 條形碼：9787520316484 ; 978-7-5203-1648-4
- 裝幀：一般膠版紙
- 冊數：暫無
- 重量：暫無
- 所屬分類：>
法官司法行為的話語心理學研究 內容簡介
法官決策話語主要有調節類、征詢類、表征類和定性類等四種。但每種話語行為都有多種不同的實現形式。這表明，法官行為是結構性與動態性的矛盾統一。從法官認同方面，我們發現，法官這些司法話語行為的差異性可從法官認同的三個層面(即話語性、情景性和轉移性)得到解釋。基于法官的認同取向，我們發現法官決策行為差異可大體表現在三個方面：首先。法官在司法過程中是以程序為知名品牌還是以實體內容為知名品牌。其次、法官在人際定位上是傾向于型還是友好型。很后、法官在認知取向上是采用范疇化模式還是敘事模式。這些差異不是法官固有角色特征的屬性，而是法官在司法過程中存在狀態的具體關切體現。基于本研究的分析結果，本文很后提出司法公正是一種話語建構的實體，存在于日常司法話語之中。司法行為的核心是司法過程中法官的關切狀態。法官司法行為研究的本質就是揭示由法官認同所體現的法官關切狀態。司法改革需要使法官的“純真”知識合法化。解決這個問題的方法是提高法官的批判性話語意識。
法官司法行為的話語心理學研究 目錄
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
展開全部
法官司法行為的話語心理學研究 節選
《江西師范大學外國語言文學學術文庫：法官司法行為的話語心理學研究（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. ……
法官司法行為的話語心理學研究 作者簡介
Zhong Cai-shun is currently a lecturer in Jiangxi Normal University. He has been working there since 2005 after he obtained his master degree from Zhejiang Normal University.From 2006 to 2009， he proceeded to pursue his PhD degree in Guangdong University of Foreign Studies， where he received his academic training in forensic linguistics. He did research on forensic phonetic science as a visiting scholar at the University of York during 2015-2016. He has so far published more than 20 research papers and one monograph. He is now a member of the specialized Forensic Linguistics council in China's Association of English and Chinese Comparative Research. His research interests include legal discourse analysis， forensic speaker identification and sociophonetics.
書友推薦
- >
企鵝口袋書系列·偉大的思想20:論自然選擇(英漢雙語)
- >
月亮虎
- >
山海經
- >
唐代進士錄
- >
李白與唐代文化
- >
中國人在烏蘇里邊疆區:歷史與人類學概述
- >
上帝之肋:男人的真實旅程
- >
小考拉的故事-套裝共3冊
本類暢銷
