The Anchor of Justice: Anchoring Effect on Judicial Decisions
Keywords:
Court decision, Heuristic and biases;, Anchoring effect, Non-economic damages, Penalty calculationAbstract
Many human decisions can be affected by the anchoring effect, which occurs when a previously considered standard influences a later numerical judgment. Even court decisions that involve some kind of numerical estimation, such as the determination of the appropriate length of a defendant’s prison term or the value of non-economic damages, can be affected by this phenomenon. This paper analyzes the main scientific researches that investigate the impact of the anchoring effect on judicial decisions, both in simulated environments and in real situations.
Downloads
References
CHANG, Yun-chien; CHEN, Kong-Pin; LIN, Chang‐Ching. Anchoring effect in real litigation: An empirical study. University of Chicago Coase-Sandor Institute for Law & Economics Research Paper, n. 744, 2016.
CHAPMAN, Gretchen B.; BORNSTEIN, Brian H. The more you ask for, the more you get: Anchoring in personal injury verdicts. Applied cognitive psychology, v. 10, n. 6, p. 519-540, 1996.
EBBESEN, E. B.; KONECNI, V. J. The process of adult felons: A causal analysis of judicial decision. The trial process, p. 413-458, 1981.
ENGLICH, Birte; MUSSWEILER, Thomas; STRACK, Fritz. Playing dice with criminal sentences: The influence of irrelevant anchors on experts’ judicial decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, v. 32, n. 2, p. 188-200, 2006.
GREENE, Edith. On juries and damage awards: The process of decision-making. Law & Contemp. Probs., v. 52, p. 225, 1989.
GUTHRIE, Chris; RACHLINSKI, Jeffrey J.; WISTRICH, Andrew J. Inside the judicial mind. Cornell L. Rev., v. 86, p. 777, 2000.
HINSZ, Verlin B.; INDAHL, Kristin E. Assimilation to Anchors for Damage Awards in a Mock Civil Trial. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, v. 25, n. 11, p. 991-1026, 1995.
KAHNEMAM, Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux: Nova Iorque, 2011.
KIM, Jungwook; CHAE, Subok. Anchoring Effect of the Prosecutor's Demand on Sentence: Evidence from Korean Sexual Crime Case. KDI Journal of Economic Policy, v. 39, n. 3, p. 1-18, 2017.
LEAL, Fernando; RIBEIRO, Leandro Molhano. Heurística de ancoragem e fixação de danos morais em juizados especiais cíveis no Rio de Janeiro: uma nova análise. Revista Brasileira de Políticas Públicas, v. 8, n. 2, 2018.
LEAL, Fernando; RIBEIRO, Leandro Molhano. O direito é sempre relevante? Heurística de ancoragem e fixação de valores indenizatórios em pedidos de dano moral em juizados especiais do Rio de Janeiro. Revista Brasileira de Direitos Fundamentais & Justiça, v. 10, n. 35, p. 253-284, 2016.
MARTI, Mollie W.; WISSLER, Roselle L. Be careful what you ask for: The effect of anchors on personal-injury damages awards. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, v. 6, n. 2, p. 91, 2000.
MUSSWEILER, Thomas; ENGLICH, Birte; STRACK, Fritz. 10 Anchoring effect. Cognitive illusions: A handbook on fallacies and biases in thinking, judgement and memory, p. 183/199, 2004.
MUSSWEILER, Thomas; STRACK, Fritz. The use of category and exemplar knowledge in the solution of anchoring tasks. Journal of personality and social psychology, v. 78, n. 6, p. 1038, 2000.
RABELAIS, François. Gargântua e Pantagruel. Trad. David Jardim Júnior. Belo Horizonte: Itatiaia, 2003.
RACHLINSKI, Jeffrey J.; WISTRICH, Andrew J.; GUTHRIE, Chris. Can judges make reliable numeric judgments: distorted damages and skewed sentences. Ind. LJ, v. 90, p. 695, 2015.
RAITZ, Allan E OUTROS. Determining damages. Law and Human Behavior, v. 14, n. 4, p. 385-395, 1990.
TVERSKY, Amos; KAHNEMAN, Daniel. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. science, v. 185, n. 4157, p. 1124-1131, 1974.
WILSON, Timothy D. et al. A new look at anchoring effects: basic anchoring and its antecedents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, v. 125, n. 4, p. 387, 1996.
Civilistica.com is licensed under a 