法律决策中的偏见:比较检察官、辩护律师、法律系学生和外行

IF 1.2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Doron Teichman, Eyal Zamir, Ilana Ritov
{"title":"法律决策中的偏见:比较检察官、辩护律师、法律系学生和外行","authors":"Doron Teichman,&nbsp;Eyal Zamir,&nbsp;Ilana Ritov","doi":"10.1111/jels.12365","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Previous studies of judgment and decision-making in adjudication have largely focused on juries and judges. This body of work demonstrated that legal training and professional experience sometimes affect attitudes and mitigate the susceptibility to cognitive biases, but often they do not. Relatively few experimental studies examined the decisions of prosecutors and defense lawyers, although they play a major role, especially in legal systems where prosecutors have a broad discretion in charging decisions, courts' discretion regarding sentencing is constrained, and plea bargains abound. This study directly compares laypersons, law students, and legal practitioners—including prosecutors and defense lawyers—in terms of their attitudes about the criminal justice system and their cognitive biases. It was found that the outcome bias and the anti-inference bias influenced all groups similarly, but an irrelevant anchor only impacted the decisions of laypersons and law students, and not those of legal professionals. Prosecutors were significantly more inclined to judge a behavior as negligent and reach factual conclusions supporting a conviction. However, the hypothesis that the susceptibility of prosecutors and defense lawyers to cognitive biases would be affected by their role was not borne out. The article considers possible explanations for the reported findings, and discusses their policy implications.</p>","PeriodicalId":47187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","volume":"20 4","pages":"852-894"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jels.12365","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Biases in legal decision-making: Comparing prosecutors, defense attorneys, law students, and laypersons\",\"authors\":\"Doron Teichman,&nbsp;Eyal Zamir,&nbsp;Ilana Ritov\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jels.12365\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Previous studies of judgment and decision-making in adjudication have largely focused on juries and judges. This body of work demonstrated that legal training and professional experience sometimes affect attitudes and mitigate the susceptibility to cognitive biases, but often they do not. Relatively few experimental studies examined the decisions of prosecutors and defense lawyers, although they play a major role, especially in legal systems where prosecutors have a broad discretion in charging decisions, courts' discretion regarding sentencing is constrained, and plea bargains abound. This study directly compares laypersons, law students, and legal practitioners—including prosecutors and defense lawyers—in terms of their attitudes about the criminal justice system and their cognitive biases. It was found that the outcome bias and the anti-inference bias influenced all groups similarly, but an irrelevant anchor only impacted the decisions of laypersons and law students, and not those of legal professionals. Prosecutors were significantly more inclined to judge a behavior as negligent and reach factual conclusions supporting a conviction. However, the hypothesis that the susceptibility of prosecutors and defense lawyers to cognitive biases would be affected by their role was not borne out. The article considers possible explanations for the reported findings, and discusses their policy implications.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47187,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies\",\"volume\":\"20 4\",\"pages\":\"852-894\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jels.12365\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jels.12365\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jels.12365","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要以往关于审判中的判断和决策的研究主要集中在陪审团和法官身上。这项工作表明,法律培训和专业经验有时会影响态度,减轻对认知偏见的易感性,但通常并非如此。虽然检察官和辩护律师的决定发挥着重要作用,但相对较少的实验研究审查了检察官和辩护律师的决定,特别是在检察官在指控决定中拥有广泛自由裁量权、法院在量刑方面的自由裁量权受到限制、辩诉交易比比皆是的法律体系中。这项研究直接比较了非专业人士、法律系学生和法律从业人员(包括检察官和辩护律师)对刑事司法系统的态度和他们的认知偏见。结果偏差和反推理偏差对所有群体的影响相似,但不相关的锚只影响外行和法律学生的决策,而不影响法律专业人士的决策。检察官明显更倾向于将行为判定为过失,并得出支持定罪的事实性结论。然而,检察官和辩护律师对认知偏见的易感性会受到其角色的影响的假设并未得到证实。本文考虑了对报告结果的可能解释,并讨论了它们的政策含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Biases in legal decision-making: Comparing prosecutors, defense attorneys, law students, and laypersons

Biases in legal decision-making: Comparing prosecutors, defense attorneys, law students, and laypersons

Previous studies of judgment and decision-making in adjudication have largely focused on juries and judges. This body of work demonstrated that legal training and professional experience sometimes affect attitudes and mitigate the susceptibility to cognitive biases, but often they do not. Relatively few experimental studies examined the decisions of prosecutors and defense lawyers, although they play a major role, especially in legal systems where prosecutors have a broad discretion in charging decisions, courts' discretion regarding sentencing is constrained, and plea bargains abound. This study directly compares laypersons, law students, and legal practitioners—including prosecutors and defense lawyers—in terms of their attitudes about the criminal justice system and their cognitive biases. It was found that the outcome bias and the anti-inference bias influenced all groups similarly, but an irrelevant anchor only impacted the decisions of laypersons and law students, and not those of legal professionals. Prosecutors were significantly more inclined to judge a behavior as negligent and reach factual conclusions supporting a conviction. However, the hypothesis that the susceptibility of prosecutors and defense lawyers to cognitive biases would be affected by their role was not borne out. The article considers possible explanations for the reported findings, and discusses their policy implications.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
11.80%
发文量
34
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信