Laws of cognition and the cognition of law

Cognition

Volumn 135, Issue , 2015, Pages 56-60

  Kahan, Dan M ^a  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Legal decisionmaking; Motivated cognition; Story telling model

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COGNITION; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; LAW; JURISPRUDENCE; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL;

COGNITION; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; JURISPRUDENCE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL;

EID: 84919881347     PISSN: 00100277     EISSN: 18737838     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.11.025     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Braman E. Constitutionalism and democracy: Law, politics, and perception: how policy preferences influence legal reasoning 2009, University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
2. Carlson K.A., Russo J.E. Biased interpretation of evidence by mock jurors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 2001, 7(2):91-103.
3. Edwards H.T., Livermore M.A. Pitfalls of empirical studies that attempt to understand the factors affecting appellate decisionmaking. Duke Law Journal 2008, 58:1895-1989.
4. Finkel N.J. Commonsense justice: Jurors' notions of the law 1995, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
5. Finkel N., Shaw R., Bercaw S., Koch J. Insanity defenses: From the jurors' perspective. Law & Psychology Review 1985, 9:77-92.
6. Granot Y., Balcetis E., Schneider K.E., Tyler T.R. Justice is not blind: Visual attention exaggerates effects of group identification on legal punishment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2014, 143(6):2196-2208.
7. Guthrie C., Rachlinski J.J., Wistrich A.J. Blinking on the bench: How judges decide cases. Cornell Law Review 2007, 93(1):1-43.
8. Kahan D.M. Culture, cognition, and consent: Who perceives what, and why, in 'Acquaintance Rape' cases. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 2010, 158:729-812.
9. Kahan D.M. The Supreme Court 2010 term-Foreword: Neutral principles, motivated cognition, and some problems for constitutional law. Harvard Law Review 2011, 126:1-77.
10. Kahan D.M., Hoffman D.A., Braman D. Whose eyes are you going to believe? Scott v. Harris and the perils of cognitive illiberalism. Harvard Law Review 2009, 122:837-906.
11. Kahan D.M., Hoffman D.A., Braman D., Evans D., Rachlinski J.J. They saw a protest: Cognitive illiberalism and the speech-conduct distinction. Stanford Law Review 2012, 64:851-906.
12. Lempert R.O. Modeling relevance. Michigan Law Review 1977, 75:1021-1101.
13. Margolis H. Patterns, thinking, and cognition: A theory of judgment 1987, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
14. Margolis H. Dealing with risk: Why the public and the experts disagree on environmental issues 1996, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
15. Nadler J., McDonnell M.-H. Moral character, motive, and the psychology of blame. Cornell Law Review 2011, 97:255-304.
16. Pennington N., Hastie R. Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 51(2):242-258.
17. Pennington N., Hastie R. Practical implications of psychological research on juror and jury decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 1990, 16(1):90-105.
18. Pennington N., Hastie R. A cognitive theory of juror decision making: The story model. Cardozo Law Review 1991, 13:519-557.
19. Pennington N., Hastie R. Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1992, 62(2):189-206.
20. Sherman D.K., Cohen G.L. The psychology of self-defense: Self-affirmation theory advances in experimental social psychology 2006, Vol. 38:183-242. Academic Press.
21. Simon D. A third view of the black box: Cognitive coherence in legal decision making. The University of Chicago Law Review 2004, 71(2):511-586.
22. Simon D., Pham L.B., Le Q.A., Holyoak K.J. The emergence of coherence over the course of decisionmaking. Journal of Experimental Psychology 2001, 27:1250-1260.
23. Slobogin C. Some hypotheses about empirical desert. Arizona State Law Journal 2010, 42:1189-1202.
24. Smith V.L. Prototypes in the courtroom: Lay representations of legal concepts. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 1991, 61:857-872.
25. Sood A.M. Motivated cognition in legal decision making-An analytic review. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 2012.
26. Sood A.M., Darley J.M. Plasticity of harm in the service of criminalization goals. The California Law Review 2012, 100:1313-1358.
27. Sunstein C.R. Behavioral law and economics 2000, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge [England]; New York.
28. Waters N.L., Hans V.P. A jury of one: Opinion formation, conformity, and dissent on juries. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 2009, 6(3):513-540.