Dominasi Lapisan Otak BAP Pencemaran Nama Baik di Kepolisian Perspektif Semiotika Kritis serta Implikasi Microlearning-nya



Erfi Firmansyah(1*), Zainal Rafli(2), Fathiaty Murthado(3),

(1) Universitas Negeri Jakarta
(2) Universitas Negeri Jakarta
(3) Universitas Negeri Jakarta
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


This study examines the dominance of the brain layers of the reporter and the accused in the Investigation Report (BAP) of the defamation case at Polda Metro Jaya with a critical semiotic perspective, as well as its implications in the application of micro-learning for learning Indonesian at the Senior High School (SMA) level. The dominance of the three brain layers—reptile, limbic, and neocortex—influences the way the reporter and the accused construct the narrative in the BAP. A critical semiotic approach is used to understand how these brain responses are reflected in word choice, sentence structure, and communication patterns in the BAP text. The results of the study indicate that the dominance of the reptilian brain more often causes defensive reactions, while the limbic layer strengthens emotional expression. Neocortex dominance, on the other hand, encourages a more logical and rational argumentation structure. Based on the analysis of the two reporters and two accused, it can be seen that in the first case, the reporter is dominant in the reptilian brain layer, while the accused tends to be dominant in the mammalian brain layer. In the second case, the reporter tends to be dominant in the mammalian brain layer, while the accused tends to be dominant in the neocortex brain layer. This study also suggests the application of micro-learning in Indonesian language learning in high schools so that students can understand and identify the construction of meaning and psychological context in legal language. With this understanding, it is expected that students will have better critical literacy skills in analyzing texts with complex social contexts.


Keywords


Brain layer dominance; critical semiotics; Examination Report (BAP); defamation; micro-learning; Indonesian language learning

Full Text:

PDF

References


Agustina, D. Semiotic Perspectives in Social Literacy Education. Journal of Literacy and Language Education, (2019). 12(3), 201-216.

Aji, M. R. Rationality in Legal Discourse: A Semiotic Analysis. Indonesian Journal of Law, (2021).14(2), 35-46.

Anwar, S. Ideology and Interpretation in Legal Language. Journal of Critical Studies, (2020).8(4), 78-93.

Azizah, N. Critical Literacy in Educational Context: Challenges and Implementation. Journal of Education and Society, (2019).15(2), 109-117.

Brown, T. Critical semiotics in legal discourse: A power analysis. Legal Studies Quarterly, (2021). 34(2), 101-120.

Carter, J. Legitimacy of legal texts: A semiotic critique. Journal of Legal Theory, (2020). 28(3), 211-230.

Chandler, D. Semiotics: The Basics. Routledge. (2017).

Chen, Y. Bias in legal semiotics: An empirical study. Asian Journal of Semiotics, (2019).15(4), 345-360.

Dewi, F. Legal Language and Cognitive Influence in Police Investigations. International Journal of Legal Studies, (2019). 7(1), 45-52.

Fauzi, N. Developing Critical Literacy through Language Education. Indonesian Journal of Language Teaching, (2019). 10(1), 99-110.

Fitriani, T. Integrating Critical Thinking in Microlearning for Secondary Education. Journal of Educational Innovations, (2021). 9(4), 231-244.

Foucault, M. The Archaeology of Knowledge. New York: Pantheon Books. (1972).

Garcia, R. Cognitive semiotics and the law: Intersections and implications. Journal of Cognitive Law, (2021). 22(1), 51-67.

Hartanto, A., & Agustin, D. Understanding Cognitive Layers in Forensic Psychology. Journal of Cognitive Studies, (2018). 4(2), 87-99.

Hartono, E. Social Constructs in Legal Documentation. Journal of Legal Semiotics, (2023). 5(1), 115-130.

Hasan, R. Emotions and Cognition in Legal Disputes. Journal of Legal Psychology, (2022). 6(3), 127-139.

Hermawan, T. Semiotic Approaches in Text Analysis for Secondary Education. Journal of Educational Theory, (2021). 11(3), 90-102.

Hernandez, M. Psychosemiotics in legal interpretation: A case study. International Journal of Semiotic Studies, (2023). 39(2), 145-160.

Jones, K., & Smith, L. Institutional narratives in legal discourse: A semiotic approach. Journal of Law and Society, (2020). 45(4), 789-812.

Kim, S., & Park, J. Technology-enhanced learning in legal studies: The role of microlearning. Journal of Educational Technology, (2022). 29(3), 310-325.

Kurniawan, B. Microlearning for Modern Education. Journal of Contemporary Learning, (2020). 3(1), 17-26.

Lee, H., & Choi, D. The semiotics of power in legal language: A critical review. Semiotic Studies Journal, (2022). 18(2), 190-205.

Martinez, P. Legal texts as semiotic artifacts: Challenges in interpretation. Journal of Semiotic Research, (2021). 27(1), 89-105.

Mulyani, S. Language and Ideology in Legal Documents: A Semiotic Approach. Language and Society, (2018). 9(2), 51-63.

Nguyen, T., et al. Microlearning in legal education: A pedagogical innovation. Journal of Legal Pedagogy, (2023). 32(1), 23-40.

Nugroho, R. Neocortex Dominance in Conflict Situations. Journal of Social Neuroscience, (2021). 8(2), 45-53.

Patel, R. Critical discourse analysis in legal frameworks. Discourse and Society, (2020). 31(4), 501-515.

Perry, L. Critical Literacy and Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge. (2012).

Prasetya, I. Challenges in Implementing Digital Learning in Secondary Schools. Journal of Educational Technology, (2022). 5(2), 101-114.

Prayoga dkk. “Kesalahan Berbahasa pada Berita Media Massa Online Kompas.com dan Alternatif sebagai Bahan Ajar Siswa SMA.” Hortatori Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia, (2024). 8(2), 01.

Purwanto, S. Holistic Education in High Schools. Indonesian Journal of Education, (2019). 12(3), 189-198.

Putra, R. Cognitive Dominance in Legal Cases: A Semiotic Review. Journal of Psychology and Society, (2019). 7(4), 70-85.

Rahayu, M. Critical Perspectives on Legal Discourse in Indonesia. Journal of Humanities and Social Studies, (2019). 11(4), 301-315.

Rahmawati, S. The Role of Reptilian Brain in Defensive Responses. Journal of Behavioral Neuroscience, (2020). 15(2), 140-152.

Santosa, H. The Role of Critical Semiotics in Legal Interpretation. Journal of Semiotic Studies, (2021). 12(3), 123-139.

Smith, J., & Johnson, T. Cognitive processes in legal text construction: A semiotic perspective. Journal of Cognitive Studies, (2020). 19(3), 345-360.

Suryani, R. The Role of Emotions in Legal Conflict: A Semiotic Perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, (2019). 18(4), 63-77.

Sutanto, Y. Integrating Critical Literacy in Language Education. Journal of Educational Innovation, (2020). 6(3), 43-58.

Suwandi, W. Rational Thinking in Legal Statements: A Cognitive Approach. Journal of Cognitive Law, (2021). 6(1), 29-41.

Wahyuni, R. Microlearning Effectiveness in Digital Classrooms. Journal of Modern Education, (2022). 4(5), 121-130.

Yulianti, D. Designing Microlearning Modules for Legal Studies. Journal of Digital Education, (2023). 5(3), 142-156.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.30998/jh.v9i1.3498

Article Metrics

Abstract Views : 352 | PDF Views : 140

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Publisher:
Universitas Indraprasta PGRI

Address: Kampus B Universitas Indraprasta PGRI Jl. Raya Tengah, Kel. Gedong, Pasar Rebo,, Jakarta Timur, Provinsi DKI Jakarta 
Phone: +62 (021) 87797409 - 87781300 | Close in sunday and public holidays in Indonesia
Work Hours: 09.00 AM – 08.00 PM
Best hours to visit: From 9 am to 11 am or after 3 pm. The busiest times are between 11 am and 3 pm.

Hortatori is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.