CAREER: A system of pleas: Using a role-playing simulation to test plea decision models

每一位美国公民都享有若干独特的权利：由我们的同行组成陪审团的权利；与我们的原告对质的权利；提出我们自己的证人的权利--归根结底是获得迅速和公开审判的权利。那些幸运地躲过司法系统审查的人永远不需要行使这些权利。那些确实发现自己卷入刑事司法系统的人也很少行使这些权利。今天的被告经常通过认罪来放弃他们的审判权和所有相关的权利。在过去的40年里，认罪人数一直在增加，现在占刑事定罪的95%以上。从审判转向认罪无疑提高了司法效率，使被告能够更快地解决案件。因此，特别令人担忧的不是认罪人数的增加，而是虚假认罪人数的增加--即被告后来被证明无罪认罪的案件。国家免责登记处报告称，认罪是大约15%的错误定罪案件的一个因素，但他认为，更多的虚假认罪从未被发现，也永远不会被发现。青少年被告特别容易认罪。鉴于我们的刑事司法系统正在向认罪转型，我们必须加深对哪些因素可能导致认罪的理解，尤其是在事实清白的情况下。我们目前对导致如此多人认罪的“交易”的理解往往与审判的影子(SOT)模式捆绑在一起，该模式假设认罪结果仅取决于认罪协议与审判定罪的处罚差异，并将审判定罪的可能性考虑在内。然而，研究表明，被告的实际有罪状态和年龄都可以显著和系统地影响认罪结果。因此，这项研究将有两个广泛的目标：1)测试SOT模型相对于更新模型的预测有效性，该模型结合了内疚状态和年龄对认罪结果的交互影响；2)扩展、测试和传播用于研究和教育目的的新型辩诉模拟软件。研究将采用2(无辜或有罪)×3(定罪概率：20%、50%或80%)×3(认罪处罚/要约：6个月、12个月或18个月)的参与者之间的设计。我们将招募大学生样本、成人样本和青少年样本。拟议研究的结果可能对目前的认罪程序产生重要的政策影响。例如，如果重大处罚差异被证明对无辜的人比有罪的人影响更大，这将为限制检察官在认罪谈判期间提供的折扣提供理由。此外，模拟软件将包括一个教育扩展，旨在提高青少年对认罪过程及其后果的理解。最终，这项研究将有助于了解美国目前是如何裁决案件的。这一裁决反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力优势和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

Every United States citizen is guaranteed a number of unique rights: the right to a jury of our peers; the right to confront our accusers; the right to present our own witnesses--ultimately, the right to a speedy and public trial. Those fortunate enough to avoid the scrutiny of the justice system never need exercise these rights. Those who do find themselves entangled in the criminal justice system also rarely exercise these rights. Today's accused frequently forgo their right to a trial, and all related rights, by entering a guilty plea. Guilty pleas have been increasing over the last 40 years and now account for over 95% of criminal convictions. The shift away from trials and toward pleas has unquestionably increased judicial efficiency, allowing defendants faster case resolutions. Consequently, it is not the increase in pleas, but the increase in false guilty pleas--cases in which a defendant subsequently proven innocent pleads guilty--that is particularly worrying. The National Registry of Exonerations has reported that guilty pleas were a factor in approximately 15% of wrongful conviction cases, but believes that many more false guilty pleas have never, and will never be discovered. Juvenile defendants are especially vulnerable to pleading guilty falsely. Given the transformation of our criminal justice system to one of pleas, it is of critical importance that we increase our understanding of what factors might lead one to plead guilty, especially when factually innocent.Our current understanding of the "deals" that lead so many to plead guilty is often tied to the shadow-of-the-trial (SoT) model, which posits that plea outcomes rely solely on the discrepancy in penalties from a plea deal versus a trial conviction, factoring in the probability of conviction at trial. Yet, research has shown that both the actual guilt status and age of the accused can significantly and systematically impact plea outcomes. Thus, the research will be conducted with two broad objectives: 1) testing the predictive validity of the SoT model against an updated model, which incorporates an interactive effect of guilt status and age on plea outcomes; and 2) expanding, testing, and disseminating novel plea-simulation software designed for both research and educational purposes. The research will employ a 2 (innocent or guilty) x 3 (conviction probability: 20%, 50%, or 80%) x 3 (plea penalty/offer: 6 months, 12 months, or 18 months) between-participants design. We will recruit a sample of college students, an adult sample, and a juvenile sample. The results of the proposed research could have important policy implications regarding current plea procedures. If, for instance, significant penalty discrepancies are shown to impact the innocent more than the guilty, it would provide justification for reining in the discounts prosecutors can offer during plea negotiations. Additionally, the simulation software will include an educational extension designed to improve comprehension of the plea process and its consequences among juveniles. Ultimately, the research will contribute significantly to understanding of how cases are now adjudicated in the United States.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.