한국 음주운전사범의 인지된 처벌억제효과 분석 : 인과관계 분석

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Deterrence theory states that the threat of punishment deters people from committing crimes. The more severe and more certain the punishment, the less likely people are to engage in criminal behaviors. An Individual level or a perceptual level research, however, did not show any consistent effects of perceived criminal punishment threats on criminal behaviors. One of the probable reasons for these mixed results of sanction perception is that it suffered from a number of methodological problems. This study tried to narrow the gap among previous studies, solving the two major methodological caveats: Using college students rather than offenders as research samples, and not adequately addressing the causal relationship among key variables in spite of the explicit causal paths that traditional deterrence theory posited. The study will use an integrated conceptual framework combining the reconceptualized deterrence model by Stafford and Warr (1993) and the social learning perspective (Akers 1998; Lanza-Kaduce 1988) as the theoretical background, and a path analysis as a main statistical method to establish a causal relationship. Finally, data from 392 DUI or traffic-related offenders from the Republic of Korea will be used for this research.
Main research questions of this thesis have been twofold: 1) to examine the direct effects of the prior DUI offending behavior and the DUI punishment experiences both personal and vicarious on the certainty of punishment, favorable attitudes toward DUI, and future intentions to DUI, respectively; and 2) to explore the causal relationship among key variables. including testing mediation effects of the certainty of punishment as well as favorable attitudes on respondents' intention to DUI.
Regarding the direct effects on the certainty of punishment, the punishment experience was statistically significant in a direction that increases the certainty of punishment. Prior DUI experience lowered the perceived chance of getting caught. Vicarious punishment experience, however, was not related to the certainty of punishment. As to the direct effects on favorable attitudes toward DUI, all the independent variables affected favorable attitudes in a positive way, except for the certainty of punishment. The analysis of the effects on intentions to DUI provided that the prior offending and favorable attitudes were robust predictors of subsequent intentions to DUI ; however, the prior punishment experience and the certainty of punishment were not significantly related to intentions to DUI. In addition, the prior vicarious punishment did not reduce, but, rather, enhanced intentions to DUI.
In relation to developing a causal model, the prior offending experience had both a statistically significant direct and indirect effect, which operated through the certainty of punishment as well as favorable attitudes on intentions to DUI. The prior punishment variable also contributed to intentions to DUI, through the certainty of punishment and favorable attitudes, even though the size of effects were near zero. The vicarious punishment experience exerted only direct effect on intentions to DUI. Turning to the effects of mediation variables, the certainty of punishment did not mediate the effects of exogenous variables that directly influence intentions to DUI. Rather, the effects of certainty of punishment occurred through the favorable attitudes variable, and the effect was negative and weak. However, in contrast, the effects of favorable attitudes on intentions to DUI were positive and strong. Moreover, it mediated the effects of other main variables, thus demonstrating that favorable attitudes worked as a key mechanism in this research model. Finally, a summary and a discussion of the results, followed by policy implications, and suggestions for future research were presented.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. Introduction 1
• Ⅱ. Literature review and Conceptual framework 4
• 1. Review of perceptual deterrence research 4
• 2. Conceptual framework and key concepts 7
• (1) Basic framework 7
• (2) Key concepts within the framework 10
• Ⅲ. Methodology 16
• 1. Research questions and hypotheses 16
• 2. Methods 19
• (1) Sample 19
• (2) Measures 20
• Ⅳ. Findings 24
• 1. Descriptive measures and correlations 24
• (1) Sample description 24
• (2) Correlations 26
• 2. Predicting key variables 29
• (1) Predicting the certainty of punishment 29
• (2) Predicting favorable attitudes toward DUI 31
• (3) Predicting intentions to DUI 33
• 3. Testing mediation effects 35
• (1) Testing model fitness 35
• (2) Path model and mediation effects 36
• Ⅴ. Conclusion 40
• 1. Discussions and policy implications 40
• 2. Limitations and future research suggestions 45
• References 46
• Appendix 52
• 국문요지 61