Parallel worlds Assessing the alignment between social science and legal practice about behavioral change

This dissertation aimed to gain a better understanding of the alignment between social scientific research and the law, specifically where law aims to shape behavior. Based on semi-structured interviews with legal practitioners, this research found that on a conceptual level, there is an alignment between the experiential knowledge of legal practitioners and social scientific research: practitioners and researchers distinguish similar concepts relevant for how law may shape behavior. On a substantive level, there is more misalignment as legal practitioners differ among themselves and pay less attention to underlying processes of how law may shape behavior. Moreover, based on the interviews, the research shows that practitioners vary greatly in their views on how valuable and useful social science is for their practice. The last part of this dissertation researched to what extent social scientific research influences decision-making on preventing crime. It found that participants who read information about the lack of evidence for the deterrent effect of more severe punishment were less inclined to double sentences than people who did not, regardless of how science was presented or information about victim harm was given.
In general, this dissertation shows the insights in the complex relationship between legal practice and social scientific research. It holds important implications for both research and legal practice: it shows that there is a surprising alignment that can function as a starting point to increase the knowledge exchange between social science and legal practice. It seems that these are not two distinct areas, but rather two parallel worlds.