| 1,276 | 1 | 182 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
本文从理论和实证两个层面，深入剖析我国完全刑事责任年龄法律的威慑效应。理论分析表明，完全刑事责任年龄法律虽然能提高未成年人参与犯罪的预期成本，但其实际威慑效果高度依赖于未成年人的法律认知程度。同时，未成年人的非理性特征会使其高估犯罪收益，可能导致在完全刑事责任年龄临界点（16周岁）右侧出现犯罪率不降反升的特殊现象。为此，本文采用差分–断点回归作为识别策略，利用知法组与不知法组两组未成年人在非理性特征上的同质性和法律知晓程度的差异性，通过差分的方式剔除非理性因素混淆影响，从而获得法律威慑效应的近似无偏估计值。基于某省少管所616份问卷数据的实证分析表明，借助普法宣传等教育手段，完全刑事责任年龄法律可将潜在犯罪数量降低约30%～60%。本文构建的犯罪模型为分析未成年人犯罪行为提供理论框架，同时为提升未成年人理性认知能力与普及法律知识等工作提供有力证据。
Abstract：This paper explores the deterrence effect of China's “full criminal responsibility age law” from both theoretical and empirical perspectives. It is shown that the impact of the “full criminal responsibility age law” on juvenile crime depends on their legal awareness, while their irrational characteristics may lead to an increase in crime rates on the right of the age threshold(16 years old). As the law-aware group and law-unaware group of juveniles have the same irrational characteristics and different levels of legal awareness, it utilizes a difference-in-discontinuities regression as the identification strategy to eliminate biases stemming from irrational factors. Empirical analysis based on the survey data from 616 questionnaires collected from a provincial juvenile correctional institution, shows that through legal education and public awareness campaigns, the law on full criminal responsibility age can reduce potential crimes by approximately 30%～60%. This crime model offers a framework to analyze juvenile crime and supports government efforts to boost reasoning skills and legal awareness.
[1]陈钰晓,赵绍阳.助力健康老龄化:长期照护保险的健康价值研究[J].统计研究, 2024, 41(3):140–152.
[2]何贵初.青少年暴力犯罪的心理学思考[J].学术论坛, 2002(5):131–133.
[3]刘宪权,石雄.对刑法修正案调整最低刑事责任年龄的商榷[J].青少年犯罪问题, 2021(1):12–19.
[4]路琦,郭开元,张萌,等. 2017年我国未成年人犯罪研究报告——基于未成年犯与其他群体的比较研究[J].青少年犯罪问题, 2018(6):29–43.
[5]四川省监狱管理局课题组.四川省未成年人犯罪现状分析及预防路径[J].犯罪与改造研究, 2023(3):22–29.
[6]王恩海.应毫不犹豫降低刑事责任年龄[J].青少年犯罪问题, 2020(2):64–71.
[7]吴鹏飞,汪梦茹.论降低刑事责任年龄对预防未成年人犯罪的影响[J].犯罪研究, 2021, 249(6):84–92.
[8] Arora A. Juvenile Crime and Anticipated Punishment[J]. American Economic Journal:Economic Policy, 2023, 15(4):522–550.
[9] Baskaran T, Hessami Z. Does the Election of a Female Leader Clear the Way for More Women in Politics? American Economic Journal:Economic Policy, 2018, 10(3):95–121.
[10] Becker G S. Crime and Punishment:An Economic Approach[J]. Journal of Political Economy, 1968, 76(2):169–217.
[11] Carpenter C, Dobkin C. The Effect of Alcohol Consumption on Mortality:Regression Discontinuity Evidence from the Minimum Drinking Age[J]. American Economic Journal:Applied Economics, 2009, 1(1):164–182.
[12] Castro M, Tirso C. The Impacts of the Age of Majority on the Exposure to Violent Crimes[J]. Empirical Economics, 2023, 64(2):983–1023.
[13] Cauffman E, Steinberg L.(Im)maturity of Judgment in Adolescence:Why Adolescents May Be Less Culpable than Adults[J]. Behavioral Sciences&the Law, 2000, 18(6):741–760.
[14] Damm A P, Gorinas C. Prison as a Criminal School:Peer Effects and Criminal Learning behind Bars[J]. The Journal of Law and Economics,2020, 63(1):149–180.
[15] Damm A P, Larsen B?, Nielsen H S, et al. Lowering the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility:Consequences for Juvenile Crime and Education[R]. Working Paper, 2017.
[16] Felson R B, Vanhee A J. Situational Peer Effects on Delinquency[J]. Justice Quarterly, 2023, 40(3):427–449.
[17] Hansen B, Waddell G. Walk Like a Man:Do Juvenile Offenders Respond to Being Tried as Adults?[R]. Working Paper, 2014.
[18] Lee D S, Lemieux T. Regression Discontinuity Designs in Economics[J]. Journal of Economic Literature, 2010, 48(2):281–355.
[19] Lee D S, McCrary J. The Deterrence Effect of Prison:Dynamic Theory and Evidence[M]. Bingley:Emerald Publishing Limited, 2017.
[20] Levitt S D, Lochner L. The Determinants of Juvenile Crime[M]. Risky Behavior among Youths:An Economic Analysis, University of Chicago Press, 2001.
[21] Lochner L, Moretti E. The Effect of Education on Crime:Evidence from Prison Inmates, Arrests, and Self-Reports[J]. American Economic Review, 2004, 94(1):155–189.
[22] Loeffler C E, Braga A A. Estimating the Effects of Shrinking the Criminal Justice System on Criminal Recidivism[J]. Criminology&Public Policy, 2022, 21(3):595–617.
[23] Loeffler C E, Chalfin A. Estimating the Crime Effects of Raising the Age of Majority[J]. Criminology&Public Policy, 2017, 16(1):45–71.
[24] McCrary J. Manipulation of the Running Variable in the Regression Discontinuity Design:A Density Test[J]. Journal of Econometrics, 2008,142(2):698–714.
[25] O’Brien L, Albert D, Chein J, et al. Adolescents Prefer More Immediate Rewards When in the Presence of Their Peers[J]. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 2011, 21(4):747–753.
[26] Oka T. Juvenile Crime and Punishment:Evidence from Japan[J]. Applied Economics, 2009, 41(24):3103–3115.
[27] Piquero A R. The Handbook of Criminological Theory[M]. John Wiley&Sons, 2016.
[28] Roodman D, MacKinnon J G, Nielsen M O, et al. Fast and Wild:Bootstrap Inference in Stata Using Boottest[J]. Stata Journal, 2019, 19(1):4–60.
[29] Stevenson M. Breaking Bad:Mechanisms of Social Influence and the Path to Criminality in Juvenile Jails[J]. Review of Economics and Statistics, 2017, 99(5):824–838.
(1)威慑是指通过刑罚威胁来阻止犯罪行为;失能是指犯人在监禁期间因与社会隔绝而避免犯罪。
(1)除非特别说明,后文提及的“预期收益(成本)”均指“未成年人参与犯罪活动的预期收益(成本)”。
(2)从事犯罪活动的预期收益主要包括货币收益(如抢劫、偷盗等)和精神收益(如霸凌、性侵等)两部分。本文沿用Becker(1968)的做法,并未对二者进行区分。当然,即使假设二者的边际预期收益和成本存在差异,也不会对本文的结论产生实质性影响。
(3)具体计算过程见下文“协变量平衡性检验”部分。
(4)“越轨者”是指其行为不符合社会预期或规定的人。
(5)《刑法》第十七条规定,已满16周岁的人犯罪,应当负刑事责任。已满14周岁不满16周岁的人,犯故意杀人、故意伤害致人重伤或者死亡、强奸、抢劫、贩卖毒品、放火、爆炸、投放危险物质罪的,应当负刑事责任。已满12周岁不满14周岁的人,犯故意杀人、故意伤害罪,致人死亡或者以特别残忍手段致人重伤造成严重残疾,情节恶劣,经最高人民检察院核准追诉的,应当负刑事责任。
(1)因篇幅所限,原始问卷以附录1展示,相关变量描述性统计分析及检验以附表1与附表2展示,见《统计研究》网站所列附件。下同。
(2)下文“协变量平衡性检验”排除该结果源于未成年犯的个体特征、学校教育、成长环境等因素。但是,该结果还可能源于未成年犯罪人员身体素质的变化和人口结构差异。第一,未成年犯罪人员身体素质的变化。虽然14~17岁是未成年人身体发育最快的时段,但从生理学角度来看,身体素质与年龄之间的关系应为连续函数,在某一年龄时点发生跳跃性变化的可能性很小。第二,人口结构差异。如果处理组中人口数量远高于控制组,那么在保持犯罪率不变的条件下,也有可能观察到该结果。然而,人口抽样调查数据比对的结果排除了这种可能性。因篇幅所限,上述结果以附图1展示,检验结果以附表3展示。
(3)因篇幅所限,未成年犯罪人员非理性因素检验结果以附表4展示。
(1)由前文针对情形3的分析可知,ΔQ_(η→0)~*=Bias是冲动型犯罪数量的无偏估计。
(2)该方法的优点是不必预先假设模型的设定形式,也不要求两组的干扰项满足同方差假设,而是通过多次自抽样获得待检验统计量(本文中为■)的经验分布,进而获得经验p值。
(1)因篇幅所限,随机性检验结果以附图2展示,平衡性检验结果以附表5展示。
(2)人为操控的一种方式是司法合谋。例如,已满16周岁的未成年人触犯刑法,其家人可能通过司法合谋的方式将其登记年龄篡改至16周岁以下,以使当事人逃避部分刑事责任。然而,在我国当前的司法制度下,这种司法合谋行为很难发生。
(3)这4个虚拟变量包括父亲的文化程度为小学及以下(x_1)、父亲的文化程度为初中(x_2)、母亲的文化程度为小学及以下(x_3)、母亲的文化程度为初中(x_4)。这里以x_4为例说明其定义方法:若母亲的文化程度为初中,则x_4=1,否则x_4=0。
(4)因篇幅所限,检验结果以附表6展示。
(5)因篇幅所限,安慰剂检验结果以附图3展示,稳健性检验结果以附表7展示。
基本信息:
DOI：10.19343/j.cnki.11-1302/c.2025.08.008
中图分类号:D924.1
引用信息:
[1]连玉君,李鑫,陈思恪.完全刑事责任年龄法律对未成年人犯罪行为的威慑作用研究[J].统计研究,2025,42(08):97-107.DOI:10.19343/j.cnki.11-1302/c.2025.08.008.
2025-08-25
2025-08-25