Edited by Mike McConville and Eva Pils
Chapter 5: Experimental psychology and criminal justice reform
Chinese scholarship on criminal justice over the past 30 years has been overwhelmingly theoretical rather than empirical. Zuo (2009) argues that two approaches dominate Chinese criminal procedure scholarship: the comparative approach and the normative approach. Scholars who employ the comparative approach generally look at another country’s criminal justice system to identify differences between that country and China and assess whether China should adopt the foreign practice. Scholars who employ the normative approach use principles or values such as human rights or democracy to evaluate aspects of the Chinese criminal justice system and recommend reforms they believe would better realize these principles or values. Regardless of methodological approach, Chinese scholars rarely systematically collect and analyse data to support their empirical claims about contemporary criminal justice practice or their proposals for reform (Stutsman, 2011, pp. 341–342). But important changes are underway. Chinese scholars increasingly recognize the benefits of social scientific knowledge and empirical research for understanding and reforming the Chinese criminal justice system.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.