| Project/Area Number |
16K21491
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B)
|
| Allocation Type | Multi-year Fund |
|---|
| Research Field |
Social psychology
Criminal law
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Ritsumeikan University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2016-04-01 – 2019-03-31
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2018)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥3,900,000 (Direct Cost: ¥3,000,000、Indirect Cost: ¥900,000)
Fiscal Year 2018: ¥1,430,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,100,000、Indirect Cost: ¥330,000)
Fiscal Year 2017: ¥1,170,000 (Direct Cost: ¥900,000、Indirect Cost: ¥270,000)
Fiscal Year 2016: ¥1,300,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,000,000、Indirect Cost: ¥300,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | 法心理学 / 裁判員制度 / 評議 / 可視化 / 市民の意思決定 / 裁判員裁判 / 集団意思決定 / テキストマイニング / 社会系心理学 / 刑事法学 |
|---|
| Outline of Final Research Achievements |
This study aimed to develop the way of analysis for a deliberation of Japanese mixed jury trial (Saiban in seido) in the criminal justice trial. On our early plan, we tried to compare between some experiments of group decision making and a designed mock trials. But we needed to cancel those which was planned, because we could not prepare the professional judges with high validity in the experiment. We, therefore, collected the protocol data of deliberation which was conducted by legal professionals as mock mixed jury trial. Then we have analyzed the deliberation protocol by the text mining method that we are developing. As a result, our analysis could be developed on three aspects below. 1) to include the time sequences of deliberation for analysis. 2) to find more appropriate statistical analysis, and 3) how should we put the index for the time sequence of deliberation.
|
| Academic Significance and Societal Importance of the Research Achievements |
申請時および本研究開始当初は、2009年5月の裁判員制度開始から6年が経過しており、また2019年には制度開始10周年を迎えることが予測されていた。裁判員裁判は日本司法の民主制の象徴であり、中でも市民が裁判員として参加する評議による意思決定は、日本のあらゆる政策決定プロセスの中で最も市民意見を直接的に反映する仕組みである。ゆえに本研究が検討した栽培ん裁判・評議分析技術の開発は、この制度を検証する上で一定の価値を持つ。同手法を用いて今後の制度見直し等の際に情報提供することが可能である。
|
