Criminal Intent and Consequence Severity

Abstract

Developmental theory identifies progressions in two spheres of moral behavior: the reasoning used in making moral choices in dilemmas and the relative use of intentions and consequences in judging another's actions. Adult subjects selected as high or low in moral reasoning level for moral choices sentenced hypothetical defendants for criminal acts varying in severity of intended outcome and actual consequence. Consequences affected sentencing more, and their effect was equally pronounced for both moral reasoning groups. Subjects with a high level of moral reasoning were influenced more by intention severity than were low-level subjects. Suggested guidelines on the relative importance of intentions and consequences were ignored by subjects. Individual differences in moral reasoning in choices were reflected in usage of intentions in retributive justice, giving partial support to the notion of structural parallelism. Failure of reasoning level to extend to con-sequences was attributed to the intrinsic importance of extent of harm, both legally and psychologically, to criminal punishment. It is suggested that sentencer's moral reasoning level is a potential source of disparities in discretionary punitive decisions.