刑事司法體系中少年個案犯罪思考型態之研究

A Study of the Criminal Thinking Patterns of Juvenile Case s in the Criminal Justice System

本研究目的在由個人心理面向瞭解刑事司法體系中少年犯罪思考型態為何，透過敘事訪談的分析方法，期望能對少年犯罪思考型態能有更深入之瞭解。研究對象在接受法院保護管束的少年方面，選取北部某法院少年法庭選取因違反少年事件處理法之保護事件而被判保護管束的學生5位。在少年矯正機構方面，則以某少年輔育院及某矯正學校兩機構中的學生為對象，從其中挑選出表達能力較佳之不同罪名的學生各6名，共計17名少年接受訪談。研究者在說明研究目的和程序後，擬分別與受訪少年進行個別深度訪談，並以深度訪談中的敘事訪談方式進行。訪談結果敘事研究法加以分析。因而從本研究中瞭解研究對象的犯罪思考型態為何。研究發現為：在保護管束組犯罪思考型態方面，計有「解除禁制」、「自以為是」、「情緒補償」、「過度樂觀」、「認知怠惰」等五項；在輔育院組犯罪思考型態方面，計有「推諉卸責」、「自以為是」、「權力導向」、「情緒補償」、「過度樂觀」、「認知怠惰」等六項；在矯正學校組犯罪思考型態方面，計有「推諉卸責」、「解除禁制」、「自以為是」、「情緒補償」、「過度樂觀」、「認知怠惰」、「半途而廢」等七項。其中三組共同出現的犯罪思考型態為「自以為是」、「情緒補償」、「過度樂觀」及「認知怠惰」；保護管束組及矯正學校組出現者有「解除禁制」；輔育院組及矯正學校組兩者有出現者為「推諉卸責」；另只有輔育院組出現「權力導向」思考型態，矯正學校組出現「半途而廢」的思考型態。分別就三組研究對象出現思考型態的相同點及相異點作分析討論。在建議部份，分別提出「情緒控制的訓練」、「犯罪思考想法的導正」及「加強人際關係的處理能力」等建議，期望能提供相關單位及後續研究的參考。

The purpose of this study is to understand the mode of juvenile delinquency in the criminal justice system from the perspective of personal psychology. Through the analysis method of narrative interviews, it is expected that we can have a deeper understanding of the juvenile crime thinking style. In the juvenile who was subject to court protection, the subject selected five juvenile courts in the north to select five students who were convicted of protection due to violations of the juvenile incident handling law. In the case of juvenile correctional institutions, 6 students from a juvenile academy and a correctional school were selected, and a total of 17 students were selected for interviews. After explaining the research purpose and procedures, the researchers intend toconduct individual in-depth interviews with the interviewed teenagers and conduct narrative interviews in in-depth interviews. The interview results are analyzed in the narrative research method. Therefore, from this study, we understand the criminal thinking patterns of the research subjects. The research findings are: in the protection thinking group, there are five items: ''exemption prohibition'', ''self-righteousness'', ''emotional compensation'', ''excessive optimism'', ''cognitive sluggishness'', etc. In terms of types, there are six items, such as ''reduction of responsibility'', ''self-righteousness'', ''power orientation'', ''emotional compensation'', ''over-optimism'' and ''cognitive indolence''. Seven items, such as ''removing responsibility'', ''exemption'', ''self-righteousness'', ''emotional compensation'', ''excessive optimism'', ''cognitive indolence'' and ''halfway''. Among the three groups, the types of crime thinking that are co-existing are ''self-righteousness'', ''emotional compensation'', ''over-optimism'' and ''cognitive sluggishness''; those who appear in the Protection Management Unit and Corrective Schools Group have ''exemption''; The correctional school group has emerged as ''pushing off responsibility''; in addition, only the auxiliary school group has a ''power-oriented'' thinking style, and the correctional school group has a ''half-way'' thinking style. The same points and different points of the thinking patterns of the three groups of subjects were analyzed and discussed. In the recommendations section, I propose ''Emotional Control Training'', ''Guidelines for Thinking about Crimes'' and ''Strengthening the Interpersonal Relationships''. I hope to provide reference for relevant units and follow-up studies.