Judicial decision-making a survey of the experimental evidence

Arbeitspapier

Judges are human beings. Is their behavior therefore subject to the same effects that psychology and behavioral economics have documented for convenience samples, like university students? Does that fact that they decide on behalf of third parties moderate their behavior? In which ways does the need matter to find a solution when the evidence is inconclusive and contested? How do the multiple institutional safeguards resulting from procedural law, and the ways how the parties use it, affect judicial decision-making? Many of these questions have been put to the experimental test. The paper provides a systematic overview of the rich evidence, points out gaps that still exist, and discusses methodological challenges.

Object Details

• Language: Englisch

References and Relationships

• Bibliographic citation: Series: Discussion Papers of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods ; No. 2022/6

Classification and Topics

• Classification: Wirtschaft ; Basic Areas of Law: General (Constitutional Law) ; Tort Law and Product Liability; Forensic Economics ; Criminal Law
• Subject: judicial decision-making ; bias ; heuristic ; attitudinal model ; ambiguity ; parallel con-straint satisfaction ; public perception

Contributors, Places and Time

• Event: Geistige Schöpfung
• (who): Engel, Christoph
• Event: Veröffentlichung
• (who): Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods
• (where): Bonn
• (when): 2022

Further information

• Handle: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/274055
• Last update: 10.03.2025, 11:44 AM CET