民意支持死刑的態度可改變嗎？

Can public opinion on death penalty be changed?

10.6199/NTULJ.2017.46.02.04

周愫嫻(Sus-Yan Jou)

死刑 ； 民意 ； 死刑替代方案 ； 衝突價值 ； Death Penalty ； public opinion ； alternative to death penalty ； value conflict

臺大法學論叢

46卷2期（2017 / 06 / 01）

553 - 588

繁體中文

臺灣是一個嚴刑重罰的社會嗎？這種嚴刑重罰是否近年愈發強烈？2014 年的中研院與廢死聯盟的民意調查報告結果，似乎支持這個結論，因為支持死刑的比例高達82%。然而，這種態度不可改變嗎？本文以2014 年中研院與臺灣廢死聯盟收集的民意調查資料分析顯示，至少三種因素可以改變人們反對廢死的態度：第一，提供死刑相關知識與訊息，第二，提供各種不同的替代死刑的方案，第三，找到一群心中具有多重與死刑相關衝突價值觀的民眾，因為他們最容易因為環境與條件的改變而轉變心意。至於改變的比例，第一種比較有限，約5%民眾會因增加訊息，改而支持廢死；第二種非常有效，約47%民眾會因有替代方案，改而支持廢死，尤其終身監禁不得假釋，且需工作賠償被害人的替代方案，更能使得63%民眾改而支持廢死；第三種則更為有效，因為人們對於死刑存廢的看法，經常處於矛盾價值選擇中。大部分的人在選擇對死刑應否廢除時，也常「三心二意」或心意未決，譬如：又支持個人主義，也支持集體主義；同時關心冤案，也擔心縱放；有高被害恐懼，又覺得社區很安全；既認為刑罰應該有矯治效果，也認為要有嚇阻與應報功能。本研究發現心中愈認知到這些矛盾價值的民眾，可改變性愈高。

Is Taiwan a punitive society? Or Taiwan has become more and more towards punitive? A survey conducted by Academia Sinica and the Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty in 2014 showed that 82% of the public supported the death penalty in Taiwan. It seems to support that Taiwan is indeed a punitive society. However, the research question raised by this study is whether or not the strong public support on death penalty can be changed. This present study analyzed the same 2014 survey data and found that it is possible to change the public opinion on death penalty. There are at least three methods to do so. First, 5% of the public would change their attitudes to support abolishment if more information/knowledge is provided. Second, 47% of the public would change their attitudes to support abolishment if alternative punishments are offered. The most effective alternative punishment preferred is the life sentence without parole plus prison work to compensate the victims (63% ). Last, most of the public have an ambiguous attitude to death penalty, for example, they support both individualism and collectivism, concern with both innocent cases and criminals found not-guilty in courts, have higher fear of crime but feel safe in the community, and perceived both rehabilitation and deterrence/retribution as the purposes of punishment. Nevertheless, these people who face the most value conflicts are most likely to change their originally positive attitudes of death penalty to abolishment. This study has demonstrated that the public opinion on death penalty are not as firm or unchangble as the government or society claims.

1. Manting（2014），《死刑不能拿來譴責殺勠，它本身就是殺戮》，載於：http://www.thinkingtaiwan.com/content/2014。
2. 法務部（ 2013 ） ， 《2009 年修復式司法試行方案》， 載於：http://www.moj.gov.tw/lp.asp?ctNode=33533&CtUnit=10810&BaseDSD=7&mp=001。
3. Bauman, Z.(2000).Social issues of law and order.British Journal of Criminology,40(2),205-221.
4. Brewer, M. B.,Chen, Y. R.(2007).Where (who) are collectives in collectivism? Toward conceptual clarification of individualism and collectivism.Psychological Review,114(1),133-151.
5. Craig, S. C.,Kane, J. G.,Martinez, M. D.(2002).Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't: citizens' ambivalence about abortion.Political Psychology,23(2),285-301.
6. Craig, S. C.,Martinez, M. D.,Kane, J. G.,Gainous, J.(2005).Core values, value conflict, and citizens' ambivalence about gay rights.Political Research Quarterly,58(1),5-17.
7. Garland, D.(2001).The culture of control: crime and social order in contemporary society.Oxford, England:Oxford University Press.
8. Hollway, W.,Jefferson, T.(1997).Doing narrative research differently:Free Association, Narrative and the Interview Method.London, England:Sage.
9. Hood, R.(Ed.),Deva, S.(Ed.)(2013).Confronting capital punishment in Asia: human rights, politics, and public opinion.New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
10. Hood, R.(Ed.),Deva, S.(Ed.)(2013).Confronting capital punishemnt in Asia: human rights, politics, and public opinion.New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
11. Hough, M.(Ed.),Roberts, J.(Ed.)(1996).Changing attitudes to punishment.London, England:Willan.
12. Johnson, D. T.,Zimring, F. E.(2009).The next frontier: national development, political change, and the death penalty in Asia.Oxford, England:Oxford University Press.
13. Kury, H.(Ed.)(2008).Crime and crime policy (Vol 3): fear of crime- pinitivity new development in theory and research.Bochum, Demark:Universitatsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer.
14. Lester, D.(1998).The death penalty: issues and answers.Springfield, IL:Clarles C. Thomas.
15. McCord, D.(1998).Imagining a retributivist alternative to capital punishment.Florida Law Review,50(1),1-143.
16. Newby-Clark, I. R.,McGregor I.,Zanna M. P.(2002).Thinking and caring about cognitive inconsistency: When and for whom does attitudinal ambivalence feel uncomfortable?.Journal of personality and social psychology,82(2),157-166.
17. Petty, R. E.(Ed.),Krosnick, J. A.(Ed.)(1995).Attitude strength: antecedents and consequences.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
18. Rothman, D. J.(1971).The discovery of the asylum: social order and disorder in the New Republic.Boston, MA:Little Brown.
19. Sato, M.,Johnson, D.,Tagusari, M.,Lehrfreund, S.,Jabbar, P.(2013).The death penalty in Japan: a report on Japan's legal obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and an assessment of public attitudes to capital punishment.London, England:The Death Penalty Project.
20. Sprott, J. B.,Doob, A. N.(1997).Fear, victimization, and attitudes to sentencing, the courts, and the police.Canadian Journal of Criminology,39(3),275-291.
21. Taylor, D.G.,Scheppele, K. L.,Stinchcombe, A. L.(1979).Salience of crime and support for harsher criminal sanctions.Social Problems,26(4),413-424.
22. Tonry, M.(Ed.)(2011).Why punish? how much? a reader on punishment.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
23. Tufte, E. R.(Ed.)(1970).The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems.Boston, MA:Addison and Wesley.
24. Tyler, T. R.,Boeckmann, R. J.(1997).Three strikes and you are out. but why? The psychology of public support for punishing rule breakers.Law & Society Review,31(2),237-265.
25. Zaller, J.,Feldman, S.(1992).A simple theory of the survey response: Answering questions versus revealing preferences.American journal of political science,36(3),579-616.
26. Zimring, F. E.,Hawkins, G.,Kamin, S.(2001).Punishment and democracy: three strikes and you're out in California.New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
27. 台灣廢除死刑推動聯盟(2014)。死刑民意與價值初步報告。臺北:台灣廢除死刑推動聯盟。
28. 侯崇文、許福生(1997)。治亂世用重典的民眾意向。犯罪學期刊，3，43-47。
29. 許家馨(2014)。應報即復仇？：當代應報理論及其對死刑的意涵初探。中研院法學期刊，15，207-282。
30. 陳澤憲(2011)。為什麼取消13 項死刑罪名。環球人物，44
31. 謝靜琪(2008)。死刑意向性別差異之初探。刑事政策與犯罪問題論文集（11），臺北:
32. 顏厥安(2011)。毒藥與十字架。思想，17，151-172。

1. (2018)。恐龍法官真的恐龍嗎？從大眾與法官的邏輯假設分析之。樹德科技大學學報，20(2)，183-202。