Scholarlink

<p>This study investigates—both theoretically and by means of a controlled laboratory experiment—judges’ decisions in cases when either “type-I” errors (i.e., convicting an innocent defendant) or “type-II” errors (i.e., acquitting a guilty defendant) can occur. Our findings indicate that judges are sensitive to both types of error. Furthermore, in both error scenarios we detect “compensatory leniency” in judicial decision making, with participants seeming to balance the inherent trade-off between the errors by managing jointly the two key levers that they are given by our design: (1) the decision on conviction/acquittal and (2) the decision on the severity of punishment.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Miscarriages of justice in judges’ mind: theory and experimental evidence

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年2月4日

查看全文
  • Stefania Ottone,
  • Ferruccio Ponzano,
  • Margherita Saraceno,
  • Luca Zarri

摘要

This study investigates—both theoretically and by means of a controlled laboratory experiment—judges’ decisions in cases when either “type-I” errors (i.e., convicting an innocent defendant) or “type-II” errors (i.e., acquitting a guilty defendant) can occur. Our findings indicate that judges are sensitive to both types of error. Furthermore, in both error scenarios we detect “compensatory leniency” in judicial decision making, with participants seeming to balance the inherent trade-off between the errors by managing jointly the two key levers that they are given by our design: (1) the decision on conviction/acquittal and (2) the decision on the severity of punishment.