交通案例與廢棄物清理案例之量刑因素資訊整合實驗：以犯後態度與犯罪所生之損害為例

Information Integration Models of Sentencing Factors in Traffic Cases and Waste Disposal Cases: A Study of Attitudes and Damages from Crimes

本研究將法官的量刑行為視為一種決策，以探討法庭中的各種角色就量刑因素的結合模式與量刑的刑度是否存有差異。研究方法主要採用資訊整合理論(Information Integration Theory, IIT)的實驗方法(Anderson,1981,1982)，將受測者分為法官、檢察官、律師、受刑人、一般民眾等五種角色，選定高雄、台南、屏東等地區之受測者，分別接受「交通事故」與「廢棄物清理」兩種案例施測，以獲取「犯罪所生之損害」及「犯罪後之態度」兩項量刑因素的資訊結合模式。研究發現如下：一、五種角色的個別的受測者較多使用「等權重平均模式」結合犯罪所生之損害及犯罪後之態度兩項量刑因素。二、案例類型對刑度產生影響，且廢棄物清理案例明顯重於交通案例。三、角色不同在交通事故案例之量刑無顯著差異；但在廢棄物清理案例，則有顯著差異，且主要集中在一般民眾與其他角色之間。四、在進行司法改革10 年之後，法官等利害關係人對量刑因素之認知模式已略顯不同。

This study regards the sentences from the judge as a decision-making to discuss whether there is any difference in the integration models of sentencing factors and seriousness among the roles in the court. The research adopts the experimental methods of Information Integration Theory (IIT), and divides the subjects into five roles: judges, prosecutors, lawyers, inmates and the general public. The subjects were drawn from Kaohsiung, Tainan and Pingtung areas in Taiwan and tested in the cases of “traffic accidents” and “waste disposal”. Through the experiments, the study acquired the integration modes of “the damage from crimes” and “the attitudes after committing crimes” in the measurement of punishment. Here are the research findings: 1. Individual subject from the five roles mostly uses “equal weight averaging rule” to combine the two factors of “the damages from crimes” and “the attitudes after committing crimes.” 2. The types of case have significant influence over sentences. The waste disposal cases are more serious than the traffic cases. 3. There is no significant difference in penalty measurement in traffic accident cases among the five roles. However, there are significant variations in waste disposal cases, especially between the general public and the other roles. 4. Through a decade after the justice reform, there have been slight differences in cognitive models of sentences.