범죄자 신상정보의 공개 주체와 범죄유형에 따른 정당성 인식의 차이

This study aimed to examine whether perceptions of legitimacy regarding the disclosure of a criminal's identity differ depending on the disclosing entity and the type of crime. The study targeted adults aged 18 and older residing in South Korea, with a total of 146 respondents used for the analysis. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions based on a 2 (disclosing source: government agency, private organization) x 2 (type of crime: rape causing bodily injury, child support default) between-subjects design. Before being presented with the experimental stimuli, participants answered four questions about their general perceptions of identity disclosure. After reading the details of the case and the disclosed information specific to their assigned condition, they responded to 15 questions. The results showed differences in perceived legitimacy on the disclosing source in both institutional and behavioral dimensions. Disclosure by a government agency was perceived as more legitimate, and the legitimacy of the organization was rated higher. In contrast, differences based on the type of crime were not as pronounced; however, there was a tendency to perceive identity disclosure as less legitimate in cases of child support default compared to rape causing bodily injury in both dimensions. A significant interaction between the disclosing source and the type of crime was found in institutional legitimacy, leading to a simple main effect analysis. This analysis revealed that in both crime conditions, identity disclosure by a government agency was perceived as more legitimate than by a private organization, with the difference being more pronounced in cases of child support default. Finally, I discussed about the limitations and significance of these findings.