Título: | MEASURING DECISIONMAKING MODELS: DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF AN ATTITUDE TOWARD RULES SCALE | ||||||||||||
Autor: |
MARCELO SANTINI BRANDO |
||||||||||||
Colaborador(es): |
NOEL STRUCHINER - Orientador JEAN CARLOS NATIVIDADE - Coorientador |
||||||||||||
Catalogação: | 04/AGO/2023 | Língua(s): | PORTUGUESE - BRAZIL |
||||||||||
Tipo: | TEXT | Subtipo: | THESIS | ||||||||||
Notas: |
[pt] Todos os dados constantes dos documentos são de inteira responsabilidade de seus autores. Os dados utilizados nas descrições dos documentos estão em conformidade com os sistemas da administração da PUC-Rio. [en] All data contained in the documents are the sole responsibility of the authors. The data used in the descriptions of the documents are in conformity with the systems of the administration of PUC-Rio. |
||||||||||||
Referência(s): |
[pt] https://www.maxwell.vrac.puc-rio.br/projetosEspeciais/ETDs/consultas/conteudo.php?strSecao=resultado&nrSeq=63542&idi=1 [en] https://www.maxwell.vrac.puc-rio.br/projetosEspeciais/ETDs/consultas/conteudo.php?strSecao=resultado&nrSeq=63542&idi=2 |
||||||||||||
DOI: | https://doi.org/10.17771/PUCRio.acad.63542 | ||||||||||||
Resumo: | |||||||||||||
This dissertation aims at the interdisciplinary study of legal rules as applied
by legal authorities. The research is divided in two parts. Part I’s objective is to
understand the psychological relationship between decision-making authorities
and rules through a sociopsychological construct dubbed attitude towards rules, as
well as its possible relations with the process of creating exceptions to rules in
recalcitrant experiences, with personality traits from the Big Five Factors model,
and with sociodemographic variables. After following the procedure for
constructing the psychological tests, we proceeded to search for evidence of
validity of the Attitude Towards Rules Scale (ATRS) containing 29 items. The
complete instrument containing sociodemographic items, the ATRS, the Brazilian
Short Form Scale of Descriptors of the Five Personality Factors, and hypothetical
cases to be judged by the participants, was submitted to a diverse sample of 347
lawyers from Justice System or Law School graduates. The results provide
evidence for the internal validity of the sociopsychological construct attitude
towards rules, measured by the ATRS with 12 items (Cronbach s alpha = 0.89).
Evidence for external validity was also found in correlations with the personality
trait openness to experience, with various emotions and self-perceived feelings,
with sociodemographic variables (e.g., place of residence and domain of
professional activity of the subject) as well as with the averages for the subjects’
judgments in items 2 and 3 of the hypothetical cases presented, allowing for a
justified interpretative statement such that the psychological relationship between
decision-making authorities and rules could be conceived as an attitude. Attitude
towards rules also correlated in the expected way with the responses in concrete
cases, except in one case, in which the construct seems to have surpassed its
expected conceptual boundaries. Part II was motivated by this finding and aimed
to seek a theoretical explanation, in addition to organizing the theoretical and
empirical findings into a comprehensive model of legal decision-making. To this
end, several topics related to legal exceptions were examined: its concept, the
difference between predicative exceptions and the process of excepting norms, the
elements of this process, with emphasis on normality judgments, and the possible
results (meaning change vs. defeasibility). From these distinctions, it was
hypothesized that the empirical finding that motivated the continuation of the
research is partially explained by normality judgments on the functioning of the
Law, which may initiate the process of excepting norms. Finally, the theoretical
and empirical collection is organized into a comprehensive model of legal
decision-making, which encompasses both normality and abnormality, routine
cases and unusual cases, easy cases, and hard cases. The Conclusion organizes the
central ideas of this dissertation, summarizes its main findings and reviews the
main implications for Psychology, for Legal Theory, and for Industrial and
Organizational Psychology.
|
|||||||||||||
|