Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The “voice of justice” vs. the “voice of care” in the assignment of criminal sanctions

  • Article
  • Published:
Current Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

According to Gilligan's model of moral reasoning, some people approach difficult decisions situationally and in response to needs and relationships of the people involved, often including themselves. People who think this way operate with a “care voice” and tend to be girls and women. Others do so with concerns about rights, obligations, and rules, employing conventional standards uniformly to be fair. These people operate with a “justice voice.” A study was conducted to assess the usefulness of the model for understanding student opinions of penalty for two hypothetical criminal offenders. Based upon data obtained from a self-administered written questionnaire and a quantitative index of “voice,” three themes emerged. First, most students exhibited concerns reflective of the two internal moral structures, the “care voice” and the “justice voice,” when they responded to queries about the proper function of criminal sanctions. This indicates that at least two equally legitimate yet competitive definitions of criminal justice exist. Second, gender and “voice” are associated, but not invariably. Third, “voice” is more helpful than gender for explaining penalty choices. The care model is associated with penalty choices that are responsive to needs of people involved in the situation, and the custodial nature of sanctions lends insight into these choices. The justice model is associated with the assignment of normative sanctions. Moreover, many students expressed a “model of voice,” or a view of fairness, that conflicts with the dominant model of the criminal justice system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Brown, L. M. and Gilligan, C. (1992). Meeting at the crossroads: Women's psychology and girls' development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bussey, K. and Maughan, B. (1982). Gender differences in moral reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 701–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Candee, D. and Kohlberg, L. (1987). Moral judgment and moral action: A reanalysis of Haan, Smith, and Block's (1968) free speech movement data. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 554–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caputo, G. A. (1995). Gilligan's two voices in situations of criminal sanctioning. (Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University, 1995). Dissertation Abstracts International, 56, 10-A.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmines, E. G. and Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment. Sage university paper series on quantitative applications in the social sciences (Series No. 17). Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colby, A., Kohlberg, L., Gibbs, J., and Lieberman, M. (1983). A longitudinal study of moral judgment. Monographs of the society for research in child development, 48 (1–2, Serial No. 200).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeVellis, R. F. (1991). Scale development: Theory and applications. Applied social research methods series (Vol. 26). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilligan, C. (1983). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilligan, C. (1988). Remapping the moral domain: New images of self in relationships. In C. Gilligan, J. V. Ward, and J. McLean Taylor; with B. Bardige (Eds.), Mapping the moral domain: A contribution of women's thinking to psychological theory and education (pp.3–20). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilligan, C. and Attanucci, J. (1988). Two moral orientations. In C. Gilligan, J. V. Ward, and J. McLean Taylor; with B. Bardige (Eds.), Mapping the moral domain: A contribution of women's thinking to psychological theory and education (pp.73–86). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilligan, C, Lyons, N. P., and Hanmer, T. J. (Eds.). (1989). Making connections: The relational worlds of adolescent girls at Emma Willard School. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagan, F. E. (1989). Research methods in criminal justice and criminology (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holstein, C. B. (1976). Irreversible, stepwise sequence in the development of moral judgments: A longitudinal study of males and females. Child Development, 47, 51–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, K. D. (1988). Adolescents' solutions to dilemmas in fables: Two moral orientations-Two problem solving strategies. In C. Gilligan, J. V. Ward, and J. McLean Taylor ;with B. Bardige (Eds.), Mapping the moral domain: A contribution of women's thinking to psychological theory and education (pp.49–72). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knoke, D. and Burke, P. J.(1980). Log-linear models. Sage university paper series in quantitative applications in the social sciences (07–001). Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohlberg, L. (1984). Essays on moral development (Vol. 2) The psychology of moral development. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loevinger, J. (1976). Ego development: Conceptions and theories. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, N. A. (1988). Two perspectives: On self, relationships, and morality. In C. Gilligan, J. V. Ward, and J. McLean Taylor; with B. Bardige (Eds.), Mapping the moral domain: A contribution of women's thinking to psychological theory and education (pp.21–48). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Caputo, G.A. The “voice of justice” vs. the “voice of care” in the assignment of criminal sanctions. Curr Psychol 19, 70–81 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-000-1005-9

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-000-1005-9

Keywords

Navigation