Extraneous factors in judicial decisions.
Extraneous factors in judicial decisions.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1073/pnas.1018033108
复制
发表时间：
2011-04-26
影响因子：
11.1
通讯作者：
Avnaim-Pesso, Liora
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Danziger, Shai;Levav, Jonathan;Avnaim-Pesso, Liora
司法裁决是否仅以法律和事实为依据？法律的形式主义认为，法官以理性、机械和审慎的方式将法律的理由应用于案件事实。相反，法律的现实主义者认为，法律的理由的合理应用并不能充分解释法官的决定，心理、政治和社会因素影响着司法裁决。我们测试现实主义的共同漫画，正义是“什么法官吃早餐”在顺序假释的决定，由经验丰富的法官。我们记录了法官们每天两次的用餐休息时间，这导致了一天中的审议被分割成三个不同的“决定会议”。“我们发现，在每次决策会议中，有利裁决的比例从65%逐渐下降到几乎为零，并在休息后突然恢复到65%。我们的研究结果表明，司法裁决可能会受到外部变量的影响，而这些变量本应与法律的决定无关。
Are judicial rulings based solely on laws and facts? Legal formalism holds that judges apply legal reasons to the facts of a case in a rational, mechanical, and deliberative manner. In contrast, legal realists argue that the rational application of legal reasons does not sufficiently explain the decisions of judges and that psychological, political, and social factors influence judicial rulings. We test the common caricature of realism that justice is "what the judge ate for breakfast" in sequential parole decisions made by experienced judges. We record the judges' two daily food breaks, which result in segmenting the deliberations of the day into three distinct "decision sessions." We find that the percentage of favorable rulings drops gradually from 65% to nearly zero within each decision session and returns abruptly to 65% after a break. Our findings suggest that judicial rulings can be swayed by extraneous variables that should have no bearing on legal decisions.