Summary of demographic characteristics.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) has been associated with increased risk of criminality, yet very little is known about how individuals with TBI may intersect with the adjudication phase of the criminal justice system. Therefore, the aim of this study was to conduct the first empirical investigation of how individuals with TBI are perceived within the context of a UK magistrates’ court, and how the perceived controllability of the onset of injury may influence perceptions and sentencing-related recommendations. 174 participants (60.35% female, mean age = 34.86 years) from a general population sample, reflecting diverse employment and education backgrounds, read a fictional transcript of a magistrate sentencing a defendant for an assault charge. Participants were randomly allocated to a single condition (Onset Controllable, Onset Uncontrollable, or no-TBI control), where the onset controllability of the injury was experimentally manipulated. Participants were asked to make sentence related recommendations and to rate the defendant’s level of risk and dangerousness, behavioural tendencies, and the extent to which they felt empathy/sympathy towards them. Additionally, their proximity to, knowledge of, and attitudes towards brain injury were assessed. The perceived onset controllability of the TBI was not found to influence perceptions and sentencing-related recommendations. Instead, participants reported feeling more empathetic towards the defendant and rated their behavioural tendencies more favourably if they were described as having sustained a TBI, irrespective of its onset controllability. This suggests that the presence of TBI might evoke strong empathic responses that counteract the tendency to assign blame based on controllability and may also lead to more favourable behavioural perceptions, but that such evaluations are not strong enough to exert an influence on sentencing related recommendations. Consequently, it is possible that the invisible nature of TBI-related disability, coupled with poor public understanding, may mean that information about a defendant’s brain injury is overlooked and/or not taken into full account in sentencing related recommendations.

现有研究表明，创伤性脑损伤（Traumatic Brain Injury，TBI）与犯罪风险升高存在关联，但目前学界对创伤性脑损伤患者如何与刑事司法系统的审判阶段产生交集的认知仍极为有限。因此，本研究旨在开展首项实证研究，探究创伤性脑损伤患者在英国治安法院语境下的认知评价情况，以及损伤起病的感知可控性如何影响对患者的认知评价与量刑相关建议。本研究招募了174名来自普通人群的参与者，其就业与教育背景均呈现多样化特征，其中女性占比60.35%，平均年龄为34.86岁。参与者需阅读一份虚构庭审笔录，内容为治安法官就一名因袭击控罪被起诉的被告人作出量刑裁决的过程。参与者被随机分配至三组实验条件之一：损伤起病可控组（Onset Controllable）、损伤起病不可控组（Onset Uncontrollable）以及无TBI对照组，实验过程中对损伤起病的可控性进行了人为操控。研究要求参与者给出与量刑相关的建议，并对被告人的风险与危险性等级、行为倾向，以及自身对被告人的共情/同情程度进行评分。此外，研究还对参与者与脑损伤群体的亲近程度、对脑损伤的认知水平及相关态度进行了评估。研究结果显示，创伤性脑损伤起病的感知可控性并未对参与者的认知评价与量刑相关建议产生显著影响。与之相反，当被告人被描述为曾罹患创伤性脑损伤时，无论其损伤起病是否可控，参与者均会对被告人表现出更强的共情，并对其行为倾向给出更为积极的评分。这表明，创伤性脑损伤的存在可能会唤起强烈的共情反应，抵消基于可控性进行归责的倾向，同时也可能促使对行为倾向作出更为积极的认知评价，但此类评价的强度尚不足以对量刑相关建议产生影响。因此，创伤性脑损伤相关残疾具有隐蔽性，加之公众对其认知不足，可能导致被告人的脑损伤相关信息在量刑相关建议中被忽视，或未得到充分考量。