E. Sousa (**)

RESUMO

Este artigo foca as questões relativas ao Conhecimento técnico, formação universitária e género sexual. Analisa ainda as variáveis legais e exra-legais a propósito de um crime de violação feminina envolvendoassimetria de pertenças sociais. Na sequência da revisão da literatura na área da Psicologia foram hipotetizadas: (a) uma divergência de perspectivas emfunção do género sexual, (b) uma divergência emfunção da configuração das pertenças sociais dos alvos do libelo acusatório, e (c) uma semelhança de perspectivas em função da educação formal em Direito, seja em termos da complexidade representacional, da inferência, ou ainda da decisão penal. Mais especificamente, estas incidiram nos elementos do facto, nos itens inferenciais relevantes e irrelevantes bem como nos elementos da decisão (sentença e medida da pena).

Os resultados das análises multivariadas de variância revelaram diferenças significativas nas variáveis legais e extralegais quer na apreciação legal do ilícito penal, quer na inferência. O treino universitário que não teve efeito significativo, nem na complexidade representacional nem na decisão penal, produziu, não obstante, conhecimento irrelevante menos extremado. De igual modo, o género sexual do julgador afectou o juízo subjectivo da contribuição da ofendida no âmbito do enquadramento legal, bem como a decisão penal. As mulheres foram, de forma homogénea, ligeiramente mais severas do que os homens. Por fim, a configuração das pertenças sociais da vítima e do réu teve apenas um efeito significativo no enquadramento legal. Os resultados são discutidos em termos da justiça social e de considerações legais sobre a violação.

Palavras-chave: Psicologia-Direito, Psicologia Social do Conhecimento, tratamento da informação, violação, género sexual.

ABSTRACT

This paper deals with knowledge, University Law training and gender. It inspects legal and extra-legal variables in the case of a female rape-crime case involving assymetric social membership of both the victim and the offender. After reviewing recent literature on psychology, we hypothezised divergent perspectives as a function of gender, and of the configuration of membership of social groups of both the intervenients, as well as similar perspectives as a function of formal education (1st and 5th year of the University) in terms of representational complexity, inference and decision, be it legal components of the case, Law-relevant and irrelevant inference itens or penal decisions in terms of both verdict and penalty.

The results of multivariate analyses of variance revealed the importance of both the legal and the ex-tra-legal variables on the legal framing of the crime-case and inference. Law training, which did neither have a significant effect on penalty nor on representational complexity, presented a significant effect on the legal components of the case, and produced less extreme irrelevant knowledge. Also, judge's gender affected the legal components of the case, namely the perceived contribution of the victim, and penalty. Females were slightly harsher. Finally, the configuration of assymetric social membership of both the victim and the offender affected the legal framing of the case.

Results are discussed in terms of Psychology, social justice and Law considerations on rape.

Key-words: Psychology-Law, Social psychology of knowledge, information-processing, rape, gender.

Full text only available in PDF format.

REFERÊNCIAS BIBLIOGRÁFICAS

Baldwin, M., & Sinclair, L. (1996). Self-esteem and «if..then» contingencies of interpersonal acceptance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71 (6), 1130-1141.        [ Links ]

Beleza, T. (1982). A mulher e o Código Penal de 1982. Revista da Comissão da Condição Feminina.

Borgida, E. (1980). Evidentiary reform of rape laws: A psycholegal approach. In P. Lipsett, & B. Bales (Eds.), New directions in psycholegal research. New York: Van Nostrand.

Borgida, E., & White, P. (1978). Social perception of rape victims: The impact of legal reform. Law and Human Behavior, 2, 339-350.

Brown, R. (1986). Social psychology, 2nd Ed.. New York: Free Press. Brownmiller, S. (1975). Against our will: Men, women and rape. New York: Sage.

Burgess, A., & Holmstrom, L. (1975). Rape: the victim and the criminal justice system. In I. Drapkin, & E. Viano (Eds.), Victimology: A new focus (Vol 3). Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books.

Calhoun, K. (1981). Assessment of long term reaction to rape. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 90 (3), 263-266.

Calhoum, L., Selby, J., Cann, A., & Keller, G. (1978). The effect of victim physical attractiveness and sex of respondents on social reactions to a victim of rape. British Journal of Social-Clinic Psychology, 17, 191-192.

Cann, A., Calhoum, L., & Selby, J. (1979). Attributing responsibility to the victim of rape: Influence of information regarding past sexual experience. Human Relations, 32, 57-67.

Cardoso, A., Leal, A., & Sardinha, L. (1985). Delitos sexuais: entre o socios e a cultura. Revista de Investigação Criminal, 18, 11-29.

Castel, R. (1991). From dangerousness to risk. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governamentability. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Carmona da Mota (1989). Ano 4.º. Revista do Ministério Público, 14, 9-52.

Chandler, ??, & Gottfredson, ?? (1976). The victim's decision to not invoke the criminal justice process. In W. F. McDonald (Ed.), Criminal justice and the victim. CA.: Sage.

Clancy, K., Bartolomeo, J., Richardson, D., & Wellford, C. (1981). Decision-making: The logic of sentencedecisions and the extent and sources of sentence disparity. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 72, 524-554.

Cruse, D., & Leigh, B. (1987). «Adam's rib» revisited: legal and non-legal influences on the processing of trial testimony. Social Behaviour, 2 (4), 221-230.

Davis, R., Brickman, E., & Baker, T. (1991). Supportive and unsupportive responses of others to rape victims: Effects on concurrent victim adjustment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 19 (3), 443-451.

Dawes, R. (1989). Experience and validity of clinical judgment: the illusory correlation. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 7 (4), 457-467.

Ebbesen, E., & Konecni, V. (1975). Decision making and information integration in the courts: The setting of bail. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 805-821.

Edwards, S. (1983). Sexuality, sexual offenses and conceptions of victims in the criminal justice process. Second International Institute Proceedings on Victimology, Bellagio.

Faigman, D. (1995). The evidentiary status of social science under Daubert: is it «scientific», «technical» or «other» knowledge? Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 14, 960-979.

Feldman-Summers, S., Gordon, P., & Meagher, J. (1979). The impact of rape on sexual satisfaction. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 88, 101-105.

Feldman-Summers, S., & Palmer, G. (1980). Rape as viewed by judges, prossecutors and police officers. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 7, 19-40.

Figueiredo Dias, J. (1978). O problema da consciência da ilicitude em Direito Penal. Coimbra: Apontamentos.

Finkel, N., Maloney, S., Valbuena, M., & Goscup, J. (1995). Lay perspectives on legal conundrums: Impossible and mistakes act cases. Law and Human Behavior, 19 (6), 593-608.

Fisher, K. W. (1980). A theory of cognitive development. Psychological Review, 87, 477-531.

Fisher, K.W., Hand, H., & Russell, S. (1984). The development of abstractions in adolescence and adulthood. In M. L. Commons, F. Richards, & C. Armon (Eds.), Beyond Formal Operations. New York: Praeger.

Frazier, P., & Haney, B. (1996). Sexual assault cases in the legal system: Police, prosecutor and victim perspectives. Law and Human Behavior, 20 (6), 607-628.

Foa, E. (1991). Processing of threat-related information in rape victims. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100 (2), 156-162.

Gerdes, P., & Dammon, E. (1983). Perception of rape victims and assaults: Effects of physical attractiveness, acquaintance and subjects' gender. Sex Roles, 19 (3-4), 141-153.

Goodman, J., & Croyle, R. (1989). Social framework testimony in employment discrimination cases. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 7, 227-241.

Heuer, L., & Penrod, S. (1994). Trial complexity: a field investigation of its meaning and its effects. Law and Human Behavior, 18 (1), 29-52.

Kanekar, S. (1988a). Attributed rape as a function of her attractiveness, physical hurt and emotional disturbance. Social Behavior, 3 (1), 37-40.

Kanekar, S, Kolsawalla, M., & Sousa, A. (1981). Attribution of responsibility to a victim of rape. British Journal of Social Psychology, 20, 165-170.

Kanekar, S., & Nazareth, A. (1988). Attributed rape victim's as a function of her attractiveness, physical hurt and emotional disturbance. Social Behavior, 3, 37-40.

Kanekar, S., & Vaz, L. (1988). Attribution of causal and moral responsibility to a victim of rape. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 37 (1), 35-49.

Kerr, N. (1984). Severity of prescribed penalty and mock jurors’verdicts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1431-1442.

Kerr, N., Hymes, R., Anderson, A., & Weathers, J. (1995). Defendant-juror similarity and mock juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 19 (6), 545-568.

Kerstetter, W. (1990). Gateway to justice: Police and prosecutorial responses to sexual assaults against women. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 81, 267-313.

Kitchener, K. (1978). Intellectual development in late adolescents and young adults: Reflective judgment and verbal reasoning. Tese de Doutoramento não Publicada. Minnesota: Universidade do Minnesota.

Kitchener, K., & King, P. (1994). The reflective judgment model: ten years of research. In M. Commons, T. Sinnot, F. Richards, & C. Amon (Eds.), Beyond formal operations III: Models and methodologies in the study of adult thought. New York: Praeger.

Kitchener, K., & Wood, P. (1987). Development of concepts of justification in German University students. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 10, 171-185.

Kruttschnitt, C. (1982). Respectable women and law. Sociological Quarterly, 23 (2), 221-234.

Lilly, J., Cullen, F., & Ball, R. (1989). Criminological theory: Context And consequences. Londres: Sage.

Lehman, D., Lempert, R., & Nisbett, R. (1988). The effects of graduate training on reasoning: Formal discipline and thinking about everyday life events. American Psychologist, 43 (6), 431-442.

Lurigio, A., Skogan, W., & Davis, R. (1990). Victims of crime. Londres: Sage.

Maes, J. (1994). Blaming the victim: Belief in control or belief in justice. Social Justice Research, 7 (1), 69-90.

Menzies, Webster, C., McMain, S., Staley, S., & Scaglioni, R. (1994). The dimensions of dangerousness revisited: assessing forensic predictions about violence. Law and Human Behavior, 18 (1), 1-28.

Monahan, J., & Walker, (1988). Social science research in Law. American Psychologist, 43, 465-472.

Montada, L. (1994). Injustice in harm and loss. Social Justice Research, 7 (1), 5-28.

Myers, M., & LaFree, G. (1982). Sexual assault and its prosecution: A comparison with other crimes. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 73, 1282-1305.

Pine, R. (1988). Speculation and reality: The role of facts in judicial protection of fundamental rights. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 136, 655-727.

Pittirlä-Backman, A. (1993). The social psychology reassessed. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakademia.

Pollard, P. (1992). Judgments about victims and attackers in depicted rapes: A review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 307-326.

Posner, R. A. (1990). The essential Holmes. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Price-Waterhouse v. Hopkins (1988), 825 F.2d458(DC Cir.1987), cert. granted, 108 S. Ct. 1106.

Pugh, M. (1983). Contributory fault and rape convictions: loglinear models for blaming the victim. Social Psychology Quarterly, 46, 233-242.

Saks, M. J. (1989). Legal policy analysis and evaluation. American Psychologist, 44, 1110-1117.

Sousa, E. (1989). Expert and novice knowledge. Comunicação apresentada no General Meeting da EAESP, Budapeste.

Sousa, E. (1990). Social information processing in legal judgments. Texto preparado para e apresentado na 3.ª Conferencia Internacional sobre Investigação em Justiça Social, Painel «Procedural Justice», Utrecht.

Sousa, E. (1992). Lay versus scientific knowledge: An accurate dichotomy? European Cognitive Bulletin, 11 (3), 307-321.

Sousa, E., Mateus, F., & Lopes, P. (1993). Decisões em matéria penal: o caso da violação e o peso de variáveis extralegais. Sociologia, 14, 141-157.

Sprecher, S., McKinney, K., & Orbuch, T. L. (1987). Has the double standard disappeared?: An experimental test. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 24-31.

Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1978). A theory of procedure. California Law Review, 66, 541-566. Walker, L. (1988). Social science research in law. American Psychologist, 43 (6), 465-472.

Walker, L., & Mohahan, J. (1987). Social frameworks: A new use of social science in law. Virginia Law Review, 73, 559-598.

Winkel, F. W., Koppelaar, L., & Vrij, A. (1988). Creating suspects in police citizen encounters: two studies on personal space and being suspect. Social Behavior, 3, 307-318.

(*) Agradece-se a colaboração dos participantes no estudo.

(**) Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada.