對精神疾病患者得減刑之態度－以臺灣大學生為例

Social Attitudes toward Sentences Commuted for Mental Illness: The Case of College Students in Taiwan

10.7014/SRMA.2023100005

林若晴(Ruo-Ching Lin)；藍璟恩(Ching-En Lan)；黃朗文(Lang-Wen Huang)

接觸經驗 ； 媒體影響 ； 精神疾病罪犯 ； 減刑態度 ； 行為認知 ； contact experience ； media influence ； criminals with mental illnesses ； attitude toward commutation policy ； behavior cognition

調查研究-方法與應用

51期（2023 / 10 / 01）

205 - 234

繁體中文;英文

自2016年震驚社會的「小燈泡事件」發生後，對於精神疾病患者量刑的議題，再度引起廣大的輿論爭議。根據我國刑法第十九條明文規定，患精神疾病之犯行者可主張其精神障礙而請求免責或減刑，以保障患有精神疾病患者之人權，但當這些在司法上以精神障礙作為減刑或不罰的案件時，總會引發社會爭議與輿論的批判。本研究以大學生作為研究對象，探討接觸經驗、媒體影響對精神疾病患者之行為認知以及其得減刑之態度之影響。研究結果顯示：（1）接觸經驗對精神疾病患者之行為認知影響達顯著水準；（2）接觸經驗對精神疾病患者得減刑之態度達顯著水準；（3）媒體影響對接觸經驗與對精神疾病患者之行為認知不具有調節作用；（4）對精神疾病患者之行為認知對接觸經驗與減刑態度不具有中介效果；（5）對精神疾病患者之行為認知對精神疾病患者得減刑之態度未達顯著水準。本研究旨在討論社會大眾對精神疾病患者得減刑之態度，並希望藉由實證研究結果，供未來研究者持續發展精神疾病患者之相關社會議題與社會態度之相關探討。

Over the past few years, there has been a contentious debate in Taiwan regarding the punishment of individuals with mental illness who have committed crimes. The issue revolves around the public's expectations for criminals to face appropriate legal consequences, which becomes particularly complex when mental illness is a factor. Article 19 of Taiwan's Criminal Code grants criminals with mental illness the right to assert their condition and request commutation or exemption. Given this, this legal provision has not been immune to criticism and has faced considerable public backlash in high-profile cases where mental illness is presented as a defense. Our attempt here is to not only navigate the delicate balance between safeguarding the human rights of this special group and upholding societal justice, but also to provide valuable empirical insights for future deliberations. Existing research has primarily concentrated on abolishing the death penalty for this group of criminals, however there is surprisingly limited information on public attitudes toward their commutations. Moreover, with the enactment of the National Judges Act in 2023, which introduces citizen involvement in the sentencing process, relative discussions are expected to become more indispensable. In encouraging their students to adopt diverse perspectives, universities in Taiwan have emphasized the importance of a well-rounded general education. In this sense, we believe a more inclusive discourse will enhance the analysis. To achieve a more inclusive discourse, this study aims to investigate the attitudes of Taiwanese university students toward criminals with mental illness and whether they should receive a chance of reduced sentences. The study has three primary objectives: (1) to comprehend how university students perceive the behavior of these criminals; (2) to assess their attitudes toward granting commutation to these individuals; and (3) to identify the key factors that influence these attitudes. In order to achieve our research goals, a questionnaire was conducted with 847 students. This quantitative analysis involved employing descriptive statistics, regression analysis, and the moderated mediation effect. Our study proposed four research hypotheses and found that two of them were empirically supported: (1) one's contact experience has a significantly positive effect on one's behavior cognition toward criminals with mental illness; and (2) contact experience also has a significant effect on one's attitude toward commutation for these criminals. However, two hypotheses were not supported: (1) media influence has no moderation effect between one's contact experience and one's behavior cognition toward criminals with mental illness; and (2) one's behavior cognition toward these criminals also has no mediation effect between one's contact experience and one's attitude toward their commutation. Besides, one's behavior cognition on criminals with mental illness has no significant effect on one's attitude toward commutation of these certain criminals. In summary, we found that the public often holds contradictory social attitudes toward criminals with mental illnesses, characterized by both empathy for their disability and aversion when they attempt to use mental illness as an excuse for commutation or exemption. Furthermore, although contact experience helps reduce social distance, we argue that tolerance for deviations in the daily behavior of these criminals and attitudes toward commutation should be considered as two distinct contexts. Lastly, our university student sample could serve as an example for future research, offering precious insight into the better practices of citizen judges. In essence, this study enhances the ongoing dialogue regarding societal attitudes towards commutation for individuals with mental illness who have committed crimes. We anticipate that our research will serve to foster a deeper comprehension of the complex issues surrounding this particular demographic.

1. Li, S. M.,Ho, C. Y.(2009).Contact Theory and Social Distance in Schizophrenia.Taiwanese Journal of Psychiatry,23(3),223-229.
   連結：
2. Su, Y. H.,Li, S. M.,Tsai, Y. A.(2013).Applying Rasch analysis to Assessing the Social Distance Scale in Patients with Schizophrenia.Taiwanese Journal of Psychiatry,27(4),329-333.
   連結：
3. 王志豪, Chih-Hao,顏銘漢, Ming-Han(2017)。接觸理論於精神疾病的去污名化效應。臺灣精神醫學，31(4)，346-354。
   連結：
4. 范耕維, Keng-Wei(2019)。以違法偵查作為量刑因子之正當化根據：一個刑罰理論的觀察。台大法學論叢，48(4)，2131-2198。
   連結：
5. 郭宇恆, Yu-Heng,李俊宏, Chun-Hung,吳文正, Wen-Cheng,歐陽文貞, Wen-Chen(2021)。精神疾病犯罪者監護處分時間的決定因子。中華心理衛生學刊，34(2)，157-179。
   連結：
6. 郭鈺屏, Y. P.,李明峰, M. F.,林靜蘭, E. C. L.(2016)。運用幻聽模擬於改善護生精神健康知識、對精神疾病態度及社會距離之成效。精神衛生護理雜誌，11(1)，19-26。
   連結：
7. 陳正和, Jeng-Her(2004)。影響民眾支持廢除死刑的相關社會因素的探討：社會人口轉型因素，社會情境因素，與社會條件因素的個別，統合，與中介作用。哲學與文化，31(5)，61-102。
   連結：
8. 全國法規資料庫，2007，精神衛生法 https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=L0020030，取用日期：2021 年 10 月 6 日）。（Law and Regulation Database of The Republic of China, 2007, “Mental Health Act.” https://law.moj.gov.tw/ENG/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=L0020030 (Date visited: October 6, 2021.)）
9. 全國法規資料庫，2007，精神衛生法施行細則（https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=L0020033，取用日期：2021 年 10 月 6 日）。（Law and Regulation Data- base of The Republic of China, 2007, “Mental Health Act Enforcement Rules.” https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=L0020033 (Date visited: October 6, 2021.)）
10. Alexander, L.,Link, B.(2003).The Impact of Contact on Stigmatizing Attitudes Toward People with Mental Illness.Journal of Mental Health,12(3),271-289.
11. Allport, Gordon W.(1954).The Nature of Prejudice.Massachusetts:Addison-Wesley.
12. Corrigan, P. W.,Lundin, R.(2001).Don’t Call Me Nuts: Coping with the Stigma of Mental Illness.Tinley Park, IL:Recovery Press.
13. Corrigan, P. W.,Lurie, B. D.,Goldman, H. H.(2005).How Adolescents Perceive the Stigma of Mental Illness and Alcohol Abuse? Psychiatric Services.Psychiatric Services,56(5),544-550.
14. Corrigan, P. W.,Morris, S. B.,Michaels, P. J.,Rafacz, J. D.,Rüsch, N.(2012).Challenging the Public Stigma of Mental Illness: A Meta-analysis of Outcome Studies.Psychiatric Services,63(10),963-973.
15. Corrigan, P. W.,Penn, D. L.(1999).Lesions form Social Psychology on Discrediting Psychiatric Stigma.American Psychologist,54(9),765-776.
16. Corrigan, P. W.,Watson, A. C.(2002).Understanding the Impact of Stigma on People with Mental Illness.World Psychiatry,1(1),16-20.
17. Couture, S. M.,Penn, L. D.(2003).Interpersonal Contact and the Stigma of Mental Illness: A Review of the Literature.Journal of Mental Health,12(3),291-305.
18. Desforges, D. M.,Lord, C. G.,Ramsey, S. L.,Mason, J. A.,Van Leeuwen, M. D.,West, S. C.,Lepper, M. R.(1991).Effects of Structured Cooperative Contact on Changing Negative Attitudes toward Stigmatized Social Groups.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,60(4),531-544.
19. Gilligan, C.(1982).In A Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development.Boston:Harvard University Press.
20. Graves, R. E.,Chandon, S.,Cassisi, J. E.(2008).Contact Theory and Assessment of Stigma toward Schizophrenia.Schizophrenia Research,102,235.
21. Hayes, A. F.(2013).Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach.New York:Guilford.
22. Henry, P. J.,Hardin, C. D.(2006).Status Bias in the Reduction of Implicit Prejudice in the United States and Lebanon.Psychological Science,17(10),862-868.
23. Jones, M.(2005).Can international Law Improve Mental Health? Some Thoughts on the Proposed Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities.International Journal of Law and Psychiatry,28(2),183-205.
24. Julio, Arboleda-Florez(2003).Considerations on the Stigma of Mental Illness.Canadian Journal of Psychiatry,48(10),645-650.
25. Klin, A.,Lemish, D.(2008).Mental Disorders Stigma in the Media: Review of Studies on Production, Content, and Influences.Journal of Health Communication,13(5),434-444.
26. Link, Bruce G.,Cullen, Francis T.(1986).Contact with the Mentally Ill and Perceptions of How dangerous They Are.Journal of Health and Social Behavior,27(4),289-302.
27. Nairn, R.(1999).Does the Use of Psychiatrist as Sources of Information Improve Media Depictions of Mental Illness?.Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry,33,583-588.
28. Parrott, Scott,Parrott, Caroline T.(2015).Law & Disorder: The Portrayal of Mental Illness in U.S. Crime Dramas.Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media,59(4),640-657.
29. Pescosolido, B. A.(2013).The Public Stigma of Mental Illness: What Do We Think; What Do We Know; What Can We Prove?.Journal of Health and Social Behavior,54(1),1-21.
30. Pescosolido, B. A.,Martin, J. K.,Lang, A.,Olafsdottir, S.(2008).Rethinking Theoretical Approaches to Stigma: A Framework Integrating Normative Influences on Stigma (FINIS).Social Science & Medicine,67(3),431-440.
31. Phelan, J. C.,Link, B. G.(2004).Fear of People with Mental Illnesses: The Role of Personal and Impersonal Contact and Exposure to Threat or Harm.Journal of Health Social Behavior,45,68-80.
32. Preacher, K.J.,Hayes, Andrew F.(2008).Asymptotic and Resampling Strategies for Assessing and Comparing Indirect Effects in Multiple Mediator Models.Behavior Research Methods,40(3),879-891.
33. Rössler, Patrick(ed.),Hoffner, Cynthia A.(ed.),van Zoonen, Liesbet(ed.)(2017).The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects.Malden, MA, USA:John Wiley & Sons, Inc..
34. Schwarz, J. E.(2017).Counseling Women Across the Life Span: Empowerment, Advocacy, and Intervention.New York:Springer Publishing Company.
35. Silver, Jasminei R.(2017).Moral Foundations, Intuitions of Justice, and the Intricacies of Punitive Sentiment.Law & Society Review,51(2),413-450.
36. Spreng, R. N.,McKinnon, M. C.,Mar, R. A.,Levine, B.(2009).The Toronto Empathy Questionnaire: Scale Development and Initial Validation of a Factor-analytic Solution to Multiple Empathy Measures.Journal of personality assessment,91(1),62-71.
37. Weiner, B.(1985).An Attributional Theory of Achievement Motivation and Emotion.Psychological Review,92(4),548-573.
38. 中華民國法務部，2005，中華民國刑法第 19 條立法理由（https://reurl.cc/9ZRnOY，取用日期：2020 年11月18 日）。（Content, Criminal Code, Law and Regulations Retrieving System, ROC (Taiwan), 2005, “Article 19, 2005.” http://moj.gov.tw/LawContentReason.aspx?LSID=FL001424&LawNo=19 (Date visited: November 18, 2020.)）
39. 王又增, You-Zeng(2018)。臺北=Taipei, Taiwan，臺灣大學公共衛生碩士學位學程=Master of Public Health Program, National Taiwan University。
40. 王美珍, Mei-Chang(2004)。台灣報紙對精神病患烙印化之初探。中華傳播學會，臺北=Taipei, Taiwan:
41. 李念祖, Nian-Zuo(2003)。刑罰功能與應報論均受人道主義制約—對死刑維持論的答覆。司法改革雜誌，47，15-17。
42. 李曉梅, Hsiao-Mei(2008)。臺北=Taipei, Taiwan，國立陽明大學衛生福利研究所=Institute of Health and Welfare Policy, National Yang-Ming University。
43. 林辰, Chen(2015)。嘉義=Chiayi, Taiwan，國立中正大學犯罪防治研究所=Department of Criminology, National Chung Cheng University。
44. 柯耀程, Yaw-Cheng(1998)。刑法行為評價架構的演變及省思。中正大學法學集刊，1，163-198。
45. 許家馨, Chia-Shin(2014)。應報即復仇？—當代應報理論與其對死刑之意涵初探。中研院法學期刊，15，207-283。
46. 陳文珊, Wen-Shan(2012)。從刑罰正義之倫理基礎論死刑之存廢。神學與教會，36(2)，445-477。
47. 陳杏佳, Shing-Chia(1994)。影響個人對精神疾病患者的態度之因素探討。護理雜誌，41(1)，88-92。
48. 黃忠正, Chung-Cheng(2014)。論 Otfried Höffe 的正義作為交換。政大法學評論，136，1-44。
49. 管中祥, Chung-Hsiang,戴伊筠, Yi-Jun,王皓均, Hao-Jun,陳雅萱, Ya-Xuan(2010)。媒體中的精神障礙者圖像。中華傳播學會，嘉義=Chiayi, Taiwan:
50. 黎士鳴, Shih-Ming,何政岳, Cheng-Yeuh(2009)。接觸經驗與社會距離：以精神疾病為例。台灣精神醫學，23(9)，223-229。
51. 謝靜琪, Ching-Chi(2009)。死刑意向之性別模型分析。犯罪與刑事司法研究，12，25-58。
52. 謝靜琪, Ching-Chi(2006)。民眾之死刑意向與刑罰目的之實證研究。刑事政策與犯罪研究論文集，9，17-34。