in English

Актуальные проблемы
экономики и права

 

16+

 

DOI: 10.21202/1993-047X.12.2018.4.861-875

скачать PDF

Авторы :
1. Джеффри Дж. Рот, старший преподаватель факультета «Отправление правосудия»
Университет штата Пенсильвания – Нью Кенсингтон, США



Неоднозначная реакция взломщиков на эмпатические сигналы: комплексное исследование


Цель: комплексное исследование неоднозначной реакции взломщиков на эмпатические сигналы.


Методы: диалектический подход к познанию социальных явлений, позволяющий проанализировать их в историческом развитии и функционировании в контексте совокупности объективных и субъективных факторов, который определил выбор следующих методов исследования: формально-логический, сравнительно-правовой и социологический.


Результаты: проявления эмпатии взломщиками в различных ситуациях и влияние определенных сигналов на выбор объекта преступления относятся к темам, недостаточно изученным в криминологии. В настоящей работе эти вопросы исследуются на примере выборки заключенных, отбывающих наказание за квартирные кражи со взломом. Обследуемые давали качественную оценку изображений домов и письменно ранжировали определенные сигналы, влияющие на выбор объекта. Это позволило также выявить некоторые аспекты методологии и социальной приемлемости методов опроса и оценки по фотографиям. Результаты показывают, что ряд эмпатических сигналов (например, сигналы о проживании детей или пожилых людей) могут заставить взломщиков отказаться от данного объекта,
однако такой отказ может быть также следствием альтернативной интерпретации сигналов, а также комплексной оценки этих сигналов совместно с другими признаками объекта.


Научная новизна: в работе впервые проанализирована проблема влияния эмпатических сигналов на выбор объекта кражи преступником. В качестве эмпатических сигналов респонденты назвали следующие: 1) эмпатия: а) детские игрушки во дворе; б) в доме живут инвалиды; в) в доме живут пожилые люди; 2) хозяева: а) в доме работает телевизор; б) в доме горит свет; в) на дорожке стоит машина; 3) другие средства защиты: а) во дворе есть знак охранного агентства; б) возле дома есть собака; 4) обзор: а) дом расположен на углу улицы; б) дом хорошо виден от соседей; в) рядом с домом горит свет; г) на дорожке соседей стоит машина; 5) доступ: а) на дверях есть задвижки б) на окнах есть решетки; в) на окнах стеклопакеты; г) на окнах есть запоры; 6) выгода: а) двор неухоженный, заросший;
б) краска на доме облупилась.


Практическая значимость: основные положения и выводы статьи могут быть использованы в научной и педагогической деятельности при рассмотрении вопросов, связанных с неоднозначной реакцией взломщиков на эмпатические сигналы.


Ключевые слова :

эмпатия; эмпатические сигналы; кража; квартирная кража со взломом; выбор объекта; преступление; преступник; поведение жертвы


Cписок литературы :

1. Decety J., Meyer M. From emotion resonance to empathic understanding: A social development neuroscience account, Development and Psychopathology, 2008, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 1053–1080. DOI: 10.1017/s0954579408000503
2. Barnett G. D., Mann R. E. Cognition, empathy, and sexual offending, Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 2013, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 22–33. DOI: 10.1177/1524838012467857
3. Decety J., Cowell J. M. The complex relation between morality and empathy, Trends in Cognitive Science, 2014, Vol. 18, No. 7, pp. 337–339. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2014.04.008
4. Jolliffe D., Farrington D. Is low empathy related to bullying after controlling for individual and social background variables?, Journal of Adolescence, 2011, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 59–71. DOI: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.02.001
5. Blair R. J. R. Responding to the emotions of others: Dissociating forms of empathy through the study of typical and psychiatric populations, Consciousness and Cognition, 2005, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 698–718. DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2005.06.004
6. Posick C., Rocque M., Rafter N. More than a feeling: Integrating empathy into the study of lawmaking, lawbreaking, and reactions to lawbreaking, International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 2014, Vol. 58, No. 1, pp. 526. DOI: 10.1177/0306624x12465411
7. Jolliffe D., Farrington D. Examining the relationship between low empathy and bullying, Aggressive Behavior, 2006, Vol. 32, No. 6, pp. 540–550. DOI: 10.1002/ab.20154
8. Batson C. D., Chang J., Orr R., Rowland J. Empathy, attitudes, and action: Can feeling for a member of a stigmatized group motivate one to help the group?, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2002, Vol. 28, No. 12, pp. 1656–1666. DOI: 10.1177/014616702237647
9. Condon P., Desbordes G., Miller W. B., DeSteno D. Meditation increases compassionate responses to suffering, Psychological Science, 2013, Vol. 24, No. 10, pp. 2125–2127. DOI: 10.1037/e578192014-060
10. Weisz E., Zaki J. Empathy building interventions: A review of existing work and suggestions for future directions, Oxford handbook of compassion science, ed. E. Seppala E. S.-T., S. Brown, M. Worline, D. Cameron, J. Doty, New York, NY, Oxford University Press, 2017, pp. 205–218.
11. Burke D. M. Empathy in sexually offending and nonoffending adolescent males, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2001, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 222–233. DOI: 10.1177/088626001016003003

12. Smallbone S. W., Wheaton J., Hourigan D. Trait empathy and criminal versatility in sexual offenders, Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 2003, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 49–60. DOI: 10.1177/107906320301500104
13. Cullen F. T. Beyond adolescent limited criminology: Choosing our future – the American Society of Criminology 2010 Sutherland address, Criminology, 2011, Vol. 49, No. 2, pp. 287–330. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2011.00224.x
14. Lindsey R. E., Carlozzi A. F., Eells G. T. Differences in the dispositional empathy of juvenile sex offenders, non-sexoffending delinquent juveniles, and nondelinquent juveniles, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2001, Vol. 16, No. 6, pp. 510–522. DOI: 10.1177/088626001016006002
15. Hunter J., Figueredo A. J., Becker J. V., Malamuth N. Non-sexual delinquency in juvenile sexual offenders: The mediating and moderating influences of emotional empathy, Journal of Family Violence, 2007, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 43–54. DOI: 10.1007/s10896-006-9056-9
16. Goldstein H., Higgins-D'Alessandro A. Empathy and attachment in relation to violent vs. non-violent offense history among jail inmates, Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 2001, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 31–53. DOI: 10.1300/j076v32n04_03
17. Larden M., Melin L., Holst U., Langstrom N. Moral judgment, cognitive distortions and empathy in incarcerated delinquent and community control adolescents, Psychology, Crime & Law, 2006, Vol. 12, No. 5, pp. 453–462. DOI: 10.1080/10683160500036855
18. Hepper E. G., Hart C. M., Meek R., Cisek S., Sedikides C. Narcissism and empathy in young offenders and non-offenders, European Journal of Personality, 2014, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 201–210. DOI: 10.1002/per.1939
19. Jolliffe D., Farrington D. Development and validation of the Basic Empathy Scale, Journal of Adolescence, 2006, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 589–611. DOI: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.08.010
20. Mackenzie S. Situationally edited empathy: An effect of socio-economic structure on individual choice, Critical Criminology, 2006, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 365–385. DOI: 10.1007/s10612-006-9005-1
21. Maguire M., Bennett T. Burglary in a dwelling, London, England, Heinemann Educational Books, 1982.
22. Shover N. Structures and careers in burglary, The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, 1972, Vol. 63, No. 4, pp. 540–549. DOI: 10.2307/1141808
23. Wright R. T., Decker S. H. Burglars on the job, Boston, MA, Northeastern University Press, 1994.
24. Decker S. H., Wright R. T., Logie R. H. Perceptual deterrence among active residential burglars: A research note, Criminology, 1993, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 135–147. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.1993.tb01125.x
25. Rountree P. M., Land K. C. Burglary victimization, perceptions of crime risk, and routine activities: A multilevel analysis across Seattle neighborhoods and census tracts, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1996, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 147–180. DOI: 10.1177/0022427896033002001
26. Sanders A. N., Kuhns J. B., Blevins K. R. Exploring and understanding differences between deliberate and impulsive male and female burglars, Crime & Delinquency, 2016, Vol. 63, No. 12, pp. 1547–1571. DOI: 10.1177/0011128716660519
27. Tseloni A., Wittebrood K., Farrell G., Pease K. Burglary victimization in England and Wales, the United States and the Netherlands, British Journal of Criminology, 2004, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 66–91. DOI: 10.1093/bjc/44.1.66
28. Cromwell P., Olson J. N. Breaking and entering: Burglars on burglary, Belmont, CA, Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, 2004.
29. Clare J. Examination of systematic variations in burglars' domain-specific perceptual and procedural skills, Psychology, Crime, and Law, 2011, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 199–214. DOI: 10.1080/10683160903025810
30. Nee C., White M., Woolford K., Pascu T., Barker L., Wainwright L. New methods for examining expertise in burglars in natural and simulated environments: preliminary findings, Psychology, Crime & Law, 2015, Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. 507–513. DOI: 10.1080/1068316x.2014.989849
31. Roth J. J., Roberts J. J. Now, later, or not at all: Personal and situational factors impacting burglars' target choices, Journal of Crime and Justice, 2017, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 119–137. DOI: 10.1080/0735648X.2015.1078253
32. Clarke R. V. Situational crime prevention: Successful case studies, Albany, NY, Harrow and Heston, 1997.
33. Clarke R. V., Homel R. A revised classification of situational crime prevention techniques, Crime prevention at the crossroads, ed. S. P. Lab, Cincinnati, OH, Anderson, 1997, pp. 17–27.
34. Wortley R. Guilt, shame and situational crime prevention, The politics and practice of situational crime prevention, ed. Homel R. Monsey, NY, Criminal Justice Press, 1996, pp. 115–132.
35. Nee C., Taylor M. Residential burglary in the Republic of Ireland: A situational perspective, The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 1988, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 105–116. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2311.1988.tb00609.x
36. Palmer E. J., Holmes A., Hollin C. R. Investigating burglars' decisions: Factors influencing target choice, method of entry, reasons for offending, repeat victimization of a property and victim awareness, Security Journal, 2002, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 7–18. DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.sj.8340101
37. Taylor E. Honour among thieves? How morality and rationality influence the decision-making processes of convicted domestic burglars, Criminology & Criminal Justice, 2014, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 487–502. DOI: 10.1177/1748895813505232

38. Taylor E. Paused for thought? Using verbal protocol analysis to understand the situational and temporal cues in the decisionmaking of residential burglars, Security Journal, 2018, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 343–363. DOI: 10.1057/s4128
39. Nee C., Taylor M. Examining burglars' target selection: Interview, experiment, or ethnomethodology, Psychology, Crime, and Law, 2000, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 45–59. DOI: 10.1080/10683160008410831
40. Nee C. Research on burglary at the end of the millennium: A grounded approach to understanding crime, Security Journal, 2003, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 37–44. DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.sj.8340138
41. Cozens P., Hillier D., Prescott G. Criminogenic associations and characteristic British housing designs, International Planning Studies, 2002, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 119–136. DOI: 10.1080/13563470220132218
42. Ham-Rowbottom K. A., Gifford R., Shaw K. T. Defensible space theory and the police: Assessing the vulnerability of residences to burglary, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1999, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 117–129. DOI: 10.1006/jevp.1998.0108
43. Shaw K. T., Gifford R. Residents' and burglars' assessment of burglary risk from defensible space cues, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1994, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 177–194.
44. Snook B., Dhami M. K., Kavanagh J. M. Simply criminal: Predicting burglars' occupancy decisions with a simple heuristic, Law and Human Behavior, 2010, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 316–326. DOI: 10.1007/s10979- 010-9238-0
45. Wright R. T., Logie R. H., Decker S. H. Criminal expertise and offender decision making: An experimental study of the target selection process in residential burglary, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1995, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 39–53. DOI: 10.1177/0022427895032001002
46. Greenberg E., Dunleavy E., Kutner M. Literacy behind bars: Results from the 2003 national assessment of adult literacy prison survey, National Center for Education Statistics, 2007, available at: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007473.pdf
47. Shutay J. C., Plebanski D., McCafferty M. Inmate literacy assessment study at the Lake County Indiana jail, Journal of Correctional Education, 2010, Vol. 61, No. 2, pp. 99–113.
48. Fowler F. Survey research methods, Thousand oaks, CA, Sage Publications, 2002.
49. Garcia-Retamero R., Dhami M. K. Take- the-best in expert-novice decision strategies for residential burglary, Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 2009, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 163–169. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199744282.003.0030
50. Crime in the United States, 2014: Table 7, United States Department of Justice, 2015, available at: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crimein-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-7
51. Hodgson B., Costello A. The prognostic significance of burglary in company, European Journal of Criminology, 2006, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 115–119. DOI: 10.1177/1477370806059083
52. Lamm Weisel D. Burglary of single-family houses, United States Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2004, available at: http://www.popcenter.org/problems/pdfs/burglary_of_single-family_houses.pdf
53. Lantz B., Hutchison R. Co-offender ties and the criminal career: The relationship between co-offender group structure and the individual offender, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 2015, Vol. 52, No. 5, pp. 658–690. DOI: 10.1177/0022427815576754
54. van Mastrigt S. B., Farrington D. P. Co-offending, age, gender and crime type: Implications for criminal justice policy, British Journal of Criminology, 2009, Vol. 49, No. 4, pp. 552–573. DOI: 10.1093/bjc/azp021
55. Tan L., Grace R. C. Social desirability and sexual offenders: A review, Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 2008, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 61–87. DOI: 10.1177/1079063208314820
56. King M. F., Brunner G. C. Social desirability bias: A neglected aspect of validity testing, Psychology & Marketing, 2000, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 79–103. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1520-6793(200002)17:2<79::aid-mar2>3.0.co;2-0
57. Paulhus D. L. Two-component models of socially desirable responding, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1984, Vol. 46, No. 3, pp. 598–609. DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.46.3.598
58. Mills J. F., Loza W., Kroner D. G. Predictive validity despite social desirability: Evidence for the robustness of self-report among offenders, Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 2003, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 140–150. DOI: 10.1002/cbm.536
59. van de Mortel T. F. Faking it: Social desirability response bias in self-report research, Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 2008, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 40–48.
60. Jolliffe D., Murray D. Lack of empathy and offending: Implications for tomorrow's research and practice, The future of criminology, eds. R. Loeber, B. C. Welsh, Oxford, England, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 62–69.
61. Jolliffe D., Farrington D. P. Empathy and offending: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Aggression and Violent Behavior, 2004, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 441–476. DOI: 10.1016/j.avb.2003.03.001
62. Nee C. Understanding expertise in burglars: From pre-conscious scanning to action and beyond, Aggression and Violent Behavior, 2015, Vol. 20, pp. 53–61. DOI: 10.1016/j.avb.2014.12.006
63. Dadds M. R., Cauchi J., Wimalaweera S., Hawes D. J., Brennan J. Outcomes, moderators, and mediators of empathic-emotion recognition training for complex conduct problems in childhood, Psychiatry Research, 2012, Vol. 199, No. 3, pp. 201–207. DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2012.04.033

64. Soble J. R., Spanierman L. B., Liao H. Y. Effects of a brief video intervention on White university students' racial attitudes, Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2011, Vol. 58, No. 1, pp. 151–157. DOI: 10.1037/a0021158
65. Taylor E. 'I should have been a security consultant': The Good Lives Model and residential burglars, European Journal of Criminology, 2016, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 434–450. DOI: 1477370816661743
66. Salmelainen P. The correlates of offending frequency: A study of juvenile theft offenders in detention, Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 1995, available at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/r36.pdf
67. Bergseth K. J., Bouffard J. A. Examining the effectiveness of a restorative justice program for various types of juvenile offenders, International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 2013, Vol. 57, No. 9, pp. 1054–1075. DOI: 10.1177/0306624x12453551
68. Galaway B. Crime victim and offender mediation as a social work strategy, Social Service Review, 1988, Vol. 62, No. 4, pp. 668–683. DOI: 10.1086/644581
69. Hayes H. Assessing reoffending in restorative justice conferences, The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 2005, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 77–101. DOI: 10.1375/acri.38.1.77
70. Sherman L., Strang H., Woods D. Recidivism patterns in the Canberra Reintegrative Shaming Experiments (RISE) (Final Rep.), Australian National University, Research School of Social Sciences, Centre for Restorative Justice, 2000, available at: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/aic/rjustice/rise/recidivism/report.pdf
71. Gottfredson M. R., Hirschi T. A general theory of crime, Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press, 1990.
72. Grasmick H., Tittle C., Bursik R., Arneklev B. Testing the core empirical implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi's general theory of crime, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1993, Vol. 30, pp. 5–29. DOI: 10.1177/0022427893030001002
73. Schaffer M., Clark S., Jeglic E. L. The role of empathy and parenting style in the development of antisocial behaviors, Crime & Delinquency, 2009, Vol. 55, No. 4, pp. 586–599. DOI: 10.1177/0022427896033002001
74. Strayer J., Roberts W. Children's anger, emotional expressiveness, and empathy: Relations with parents' empathy, emotional expressiveness, and parenting practices, Social Development, 2004, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 229–254. DOI: 10.1111/j. 1467-9507.2004.000265.x
75. Sykes G. M., Matza D. Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency, American Sociological Review, 1957, Vol. 22, No. 6, pp. 664–670. DOI: 10.2307/2089195
76. Cooper J. A., Walsh A., Ellis L. Is criminology moving toward a paradigm shift? Evidence from a survey of the American Society of Criminology, Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 2010, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 332–347. DOI: 10.1080/10511253.2010.487830
77. Roth J. J. The complexity of burglars' responses to empathy cues: a multi-method investigation, Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society, 2018, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 1–14.

Оригинальная публикация: https://ccjls.scholasticahq.com/article/3442-the-complexity-of-burglars-responses-to-empathy-cues-a-multimethod-investigation


Цитирование :

Рот Дж. Дж. Неоднозначная реакция взломщиков на эмпатические сигналы: комплексное исследование // Актуальные проблемы экономики и права. 2018. Т. 12, № 4. С. 861–875. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21202/1993-047X.12.2018.4.861-875


Тип статьи : Научная статья

Дата поступления статьи :
17.09.2018

Дата принятия в печать :
23.11.2018

Дата онлайн размещения :
25.12.2018