Paradoxes of proof and punishment: Psychological pitfalls in judicial decision making

Legal and Criminological Psychology

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 189-205

  De Keijser, Jan W ^a   Van Koppen, Peter J ^a  

^a NETHERLANDS INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF CRIME AND LAW ENFORCEMENT   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COURT; CRIMINAL JUSTICE; DECISION MAKING; FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY; GUILT; HUMAN; JURISPRUDENCE; LAW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRISON; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PUNISHMENT;

EID: 34248542376     PISSN: 13553259     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1348/135532506X118721     Document Type: Article

References (96)

1. Banks, W. P. (1970). Signal detection and human memory. Psychological Bulletin, 74, 81-86.
2. Connolly, T., & Zeelenberg, M. (2002). Regret in decision making. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 212-216.
3. Damaska, M. R. (1986). The faces of justice and state authority: A comparative approach to the legal process. New Haven: Yale University Press.
4. Damaška, M. R. (1997). Evidence law adrift. New Haven: Yale University Press.
5. Damaška, M. R. (1998). Truth in adjudication. Hastings Law Journal, 49, 289-308.
6. Dane, F. C. (1985). In search of reasonable doubt: A systematic examination of selected quantification approaches. Law and Human Behavior, 9, 141-158.
7. Davis, J. H. (1980). Group decision and procedural justice. In M. L. Fishbein (Ed.), Progress in social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 157-229). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Davis, J. H., Holt, R. W., Spitzer, C. E., & Stasser, G. (1981). The effects of consensus requirements and multiple decisions on mock juror verdict preferences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 1-15.
9. Devine, D. J., Clayton, L. D., Dunford, B. B., Seying, R., & Pryce, J. (2001). Jury decision making: 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 622-727.
10. Dhami, M. K., & Harries, C. (2001). Fast and frugal versus regression models of human judgement. Thinking and Reasoning, 7, 5-27.
11. Edwards, W. (1992). Discussion: Of human skills. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 53, 267-277.
12. Egan, J. P. (1975). Signal detection theory and ROC analysis. New York: Academic.
13. Engen, R. L., Gainey R. R., Crutchfield, R. D., & Weis, J. G. (2003). Discretion and disparity under sentencing guidelines: The role of departures and structured sentencing alternatives. Criminology, 41, 99-130.
14. Fitzmaurice, C., & Pease, K. (1986). The psychology of judicial sentencing. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
15. Forst, B. (2004). Errors of justice: Nature, sources and remedies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
16. Gigerenzer, G. (2002). Adaptive thinking: Rationality in the real world. New York: Oxford University Press.
17. Gigerenzer, G., & Todd, P. M. (1999). Fast and frugal heuristics: The adaptive toolbox. In G. Gigerenzer, P. M. Todd, & ABC Research Group, (Eds.), Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 3-34). New York: Oxford University Press.
18. Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P. M., & ABC Research Group (Eds.). (1999). Simple heuristics that make us smart. New York: Oxford University Press.
19. Gilhooly K. J. (1988). Thinking: Directed, undirected and creative (2nd ed.). New York: Academic.
20. Gleisser, M. (1968). Juries and justice. South Brunswick, NJ: A.S. Barnes.
21. Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
22. Greene, E. L., Chopra, S. R., Kovera, M. B., Penrod, S. D., Rose, V. G., Schuller, R. A., & Studebaker, C. A. (2002). Jurors and juries: A review of the field. In J. R. P. Ogloff (Ed.), Taking psychology and law into the twenty first century (pp. 225-284). New York: Plenum.
23. Gross, S. R. (1996). The risks of death: Why erroneous convictions are common in capital cases. Buffalo Law Review, 44, 469-500.
24. Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003). The psychology of interrogations and confessions: A handbook. Chichester: Wiley.
25. Hammitt, J. K., Carroll, S. J., & Relies, D. A. (1985). Tort standards and jury decisions. Journal of Legal Studies, 14, 751-762.
26. Hammond, K. R. (2000). Coherence and correspondence theories in judgment and decision making. In T. Connolly, H. R. Arkes, & K. R. Hammond (Eds.), Judgment and decision making: An interdisciplinary reader (2nd ed., pp. 53-65). New York: Cambridge University Press.
27. Hastie, R. (1993). Algebraic models of juror decision processes. In R. Hastie (Ed.), Inside the jury: The psychology of juror decision making (pp. 84-115). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Hastie, R., Penrod, S. D., & Pennington, N. (1983). What goes on in a jury deliberation. American Bar Association Journal, 69, 1848-1853.
29. Hawkins, K. (1986). On legal decision-making. Washington and Lee Law Review, 43, 1161-1242.
30. Hirshman, E., Lanning, K., Master, S., & Henzler, A. (2002). Signal-detection models as tools for interpreting judgements of recollections. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 151-156.
31. Hoffman, M. B. (2003). The case for jury sentencing. Duke Law Journal, 52, 951-1010.
32. Hogarth, J. (1971). Sentencing as a human process. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
33. Hood, R. (1972). Sentencing the motor offender: A study of magistrates' views and practices. London: Heinemann (Cambridge Studies in Criminology).
34. Horowitz, I. A. (1997). Reasonable doubt instructions: Commonsense justice and standard of proof. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3, 285-302.
35. Horowitz, I. A., & Bordens, K. S. (1988). The effects of outlier presence, plaintiff population size, and aggregation of plaintiffs on simulated civil jury decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 209-229.
36. Horowitz, I. A., & Bordens, K. S. (1990). An experimental investigation of procedural issues in complex tort trials. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 269-285.
37. Horowitz, I. A., & Kirkpatrick, L. C. (1996). A concept in search of a definition: The effects of reasonable doubt instructions on certainty of guilt standards and jury verdicts. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 655-670.
38. Hutton, N. (1995). Sentencing, rationality, and computer technology. Journal of Law and Society, 22, 549-570.
39. Johnson, B. D. (2005). Contextual disparities in guidelines departures: Courtroom social contexts, guidelines compliance, and extralegal disparities in criminal sentencing. Criminology, 43, 761-796.
40. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1999). Deductive reasoning. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 109-135.
41. Kagehiro, D. K., & Stanton, W. C. (1985). Legal vs. quantified definitions of standards of proof. Law and Human Behavior, 9, 159-178.
42. Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58, 697-720.
43. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982). The psychology of preferences. Scientific American, 246, 160-173.
44. Kempf-Leonard, K., & Sample, L. L. (2001). Have federal sentencing guidelines reduced severity? An examination of one circuit. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 17, 111-144.
45. Kerr, N. L. (1978). Severity of prescribed penalty and mock juror verdicts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1431-1442.
46. Kerr, N. L., Atkins, R. S., Stasser, G., Meek, D., Holt, R. W., & Davis, J. H. (1976). Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt: Effects of concept definition and assigned decision rule on the judgments of mock jurors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 282-294.
47. Klein, G. (1998). Sources of power: How people make decisions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48. Kleinmuntz, D. N., & Schkade, D. A. (1993). Information displays and decision processes. Psychological Science, 4, 221-227.
49. Koch, C. M., & Devine, D. J. (1999). Effects of reasonable doubt definition and inclusion of a lesser charge on jury verdicts. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 653-674.
50. Koneçni, V. J., & Ebbesen, E. B. (1992). Methodological issues in research on legal decision-making, with special reference to experimental simulations. In F. Lösel, D. Bender, & T. Bliesener (Eds.), Psychology and law: International perspectives (pp. 413-423). Berlin: De Gruyter.
51. Kritzer, H. M. (Ed.). (2002). Legal systems of the world: A political, social, and cultural encyclopedia (Vol. 3). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
52. Lockhart, R. S., & Murdock, B. B. (1970). Memory and the theory of signal detection. Psychological Bulletin, 74, 100-109.
53. Lovegrove, A. (1999). Theoretical and methodological issues in the psychological study of judicial sentencing. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 5, 217-250.
54. MacCoun, R. J., & Kerr, N. L. (1988). Asymmetric influence in mock deliberation: Jurors' bias for leniency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 21-33.
55. Manktelow, K. (1999). Reasoning and thinking. Hove: Psychology Press.
56. McNicol, D. (1972). A primer of signal detection theory. London: Allen and Unwin.
57. Mello, M., & Robson, R. (1985). Judge over jury: Florida's practice of imposing death over life in capital cases. Florida State University Law Review, 13, 31-75.
58. Nagel, S. S., Lamm, D., & Neef, M. G. (1981). Decision theory and juror decision-making. In B. D. Sales (Ed.), Perspectives in law and psychology: The trial process (Vol. 2, pp. 353-386). Lexington, KY: Lexington Books.
59. Nijboer, J. F. (1999). Criminal justice system. In J. M. J. Chorus, P. H. M. Gerver, E. H. Hondius, & A. K. Koekkoek (Eds.), Introduction to Dutch law (pp. 383-433). Den Haag: Kluwer.
60. Oakhill, J., & Garnham, A. (1993). On theories of belief bias in syllogictic reasoning. Cognition, 46, 87-92.
61. Poor, H. V. (1994). An introduction to signal detection and estimation (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.
62. Saks, M. J. (1997). What do jury experiments tell us about how juries (should) make decisions? Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal, 6, 1-53.
63. Sandefur, T. (2003). In defense of plea bargaining: The practice is flawed, but not unconstitutional. Regulation, 26(fall), 28-31.
64. Seta, J. J., McElroy, T., & Seta, C. E. (2001). To do or not to do: Desirability and consistency mediate judgments of regret. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 861-870.
65. Shafir, E., & LeBoeuf, R. A. (2002). Rationality. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 491-517.
66. Shanley, M. G. (1985). Comparative negligence and jury behavior. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
67. Sheppard, S. (2003). The metamorphoses of reasonable doubt: How changes in the burden of proof have weakened the presumption of innocence. Notre Dame Law Review, 78, 1165-1249.
68. Simon, R. J. (1969). Judges' translations of burden of proof into statements of probability. Trial Lawyer's Guide, 13, 103-114.
69. Simon, R. J., & Mahan, L. (1971). Quantifying burdens of proof: A view from the bench, the jury, and the classroom. Law and Society Review, 5, 319-330.
70. Solan, L. M. (1999). Refocusing the burden of proof in criminal cases: Some doubt about reasonable doubt. Texas Law Review, 78, 105-147.
71. Stasser, G., Kerr, N. L., & Bray, R. M. (1982). The social psychology of jury deliberations: Structure, process, and product. In N. L. Kerr & R. M. Bray (Eds.), The psychology of the courtroom (pp. 221-256). New York: Academic.
72. Stoffelmayr, E., & Diamond, S. S. (2000). The conflict between precision and flexibility in explaining beyond a reasonable doubt. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6, 769-787.
73. Sundby, S. E. (1989). The reasonable doubt rule and the meaning of innocence. Hastings Law Journal, 40, 457-510.
74. Taekema, S. (Ed.). (2004). Understanding Dutch law. Den Haag: Boom.
75. Tak, P. J. (1997). Sentencing and punishment in the Netherlands. In M. Tonry & K. Hatlestad (Eds.), Sentencing reform in overcrowded times: A comparative perspective (pp. 194-200). New York: Oxford University Press.
76. Tak, P. J. P. (2003). The Dutch criminal justice system: Organisation and operation (2nd ed.). Den Haag: Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- en Documentatiecentrum.
77. Thomas, E., & Parpal, M. (1987). Liability as a function of plaintiff and defendant fault. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 843-857.
78. Tindale, R. S., Davis, J. H., Vollrath, D. A., Nagao, D. H., & Hinsz, V. B. (1990). Asymmetrical social influence in freely interacting groups: A test of three models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 438-449.
79. Todd, P. M., & Gigerenzer, G. (2000). Précis of simple heuristics that make us smart. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 727-741.
80. Tonry, M. & Hatlestad, K. (Eds.). (1997). Sentencing reform in overcrowded times: A comparative perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.
81. Twining, W. L. (1991). Rethinking evidence. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
82. Twining, W. L. (1995). Anchored narratives: A comment. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 1995, 106-114.
83. Ulmer, J. T., & Kramer, J. H. (1998). The use and transformation of formal decision-making criteria: Sentencing guidelines, organizational contexts, and case processing strategies. Social Problems, 45, 248-267.
84. van Koppen, P. J. (2002). The Netherlands. In H. M. Kritzer (Ed.), Legal systems of the world: A political, social, and cultural encyclopedia (Vol. III, pp. 1114-1121). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
85. Vidmar, N. J., Lee, J., Cohen, E., & Stewart, A. (1994). Damage awards and jurors' responsibility ascriptions in medical versus automobile negligence cases. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 12, 149-160.
86. Viscusi, W. K. (1988). Pain and suffering in product liability cases: Systematic compensation or capricious awards? International Review of Law and Economics, 8, 203-220.
87. Volokh, A. (1997). Guilty men. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 146, 173-211.
88. Vrij, A. (2003). We will protect your wife and child, but only if you confess: Police interrogations in England and the Netherlands. In P. J. van Koppen & S. D. Penrod (Eds.), Adversarial versus inquisitorial justice: Psychological perspectives on criminal justice systems (pp. 53-80). New York: Plenum.
89. Wagenaar, W. A., van Koppen, P. J., & Crombag, H. F. M. (1993). Anchored narratives: The psychology of criminal evidence. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
90. Wald, A. (1947). Sequental analysis. New York: Wiley.
91. Wason, P. C. (1966). Reasoning. In B. M. Foss (Ed.), New horizons in psychology (pp. 135-151). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
92. Wigmore, J. H. (1970). Evidence (3rd revised ed. by J. H. Chadbourn). Boston: Little Brown.
93. Wissler, R. L., Evans, D. L., Hart, A. J., Morry, M. M., & Saks, M. J. (1997). Explaining 'pain and suffering' awards: The role of injury characteristics and fault attributions. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 181-207.
94. Wissler, R. L., Kuehn, P. F., & Saks, M. J. (2000). Instructing jurors on general damages in personal injury cases: Problems and possibilities. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6, 712-742.
95. Zeelenberg, M. (1999). Anticipated regret, expected feedback and behavioral decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12, 93-106.
96. Zeelenberg, M., van den Bos, K., van Dijk, E., & Pieters, R. (2002). The inaction effect in the psychology of regret. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 314-327.