Extraneous factors in judicial decisions

By Shai Danziger, Jonathan Levav, Liora Avnaim-Pesso. 2011

1,172 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, General Decision Sciences, Safety Research, Social Sciences & Humanities

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In General Decision Sciences

In Safety Research

In Social Sciences & Humanities

Citations in the corpus

A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learning (2019, background): “There are clear benefits to algorithmic decision-making; unlike people, machines do not become tired or bored [40, 98], and can take into account orders of magnitude more factors than people can.”
European Union Regulations on Algorithmic Decision-Making and a "Right to Explanation" (2016, background): “, [30, 10, 1]), and discriminatory decision making is pervasive in many of the sectors where algorithmic profiling might be introduced (e.”
The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation? (2017, background): “…Cobb-Douglas production function of the form Q = (LS + C)1−bL b NS, b ∈ [0, 1], (1) 19 The model does not predict any substantial substitution or complementarity with non-routine manual tasks. where LS and LNS are susceptible and non-susceptible labour inputs and C is computer capital.”
Simple Rules for Complex Decisions (2017, background): “is includes doctors classifying patients based on their symptoms [25], judges seing bail amounts [6] and making parole decisions [3], and managers determining which customers to target [36].”
Influence of Warm versus Cool Temperatures on Consumer Choice: A Resource Depletion Account (2012, background): “Danziger, Levav, and Avnaim-Pesso (2011) find that in complex decisions such as ruling on releasing a prisoner from jail, hungry (depleted) judges were more likely to choose the status quo.”
Temperature and Decisions: Evidence from 207,000 Court Cases (2019, background): “Graff Zivin et al. (2018) find that (outdoor) temperature above 79 ◦F on a particular day damages performance of children on math (but not reading) tasks. Park (2016) investigates the relationship between daily outdoor temperature and high school exit exams in New York city and finds that compared t”
EU regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a "right to explanation" (2016, background): “The role of extrane-ous and ethically inappropriate factors in human decision making is well documented (e.g., Tversky & Kahneman (1974); Danziger et al. (2011); Abrams et al. (2012)), and discriminatory decision making is pervasive in many of the sectors where algorithmic proﬁling might be…”
The socially extended mind (2013, background): “For example, in a recent study of judicial decisions Danziger, Levav, and Avnaim-Pesso (2011) have shown that the rational application of legal reasons does not sufficiently explain the decisions of judges.”
Whatever Happened to Self-Control? A Proposal for Integrating Notions From Trait Self-Control Studies Into State Self-Control Research (2017, positive): “People with high levels of self-control are better able to deal with this kind of dilemma, as witnessed by many studies reporting on the role of self-control in a wide variety of positive life outcomes (de Ridder et al., 2012; Tangney et al., 2004). The success story of self-control typically relate”
Emotional Judges and Unlucky Juveniles (2018, neutral): “For example, Danziger, Levav, and Avnaim-Pesso (2011a) show that the propensity of judges to make favorable parole decisions goes down significantly as they adjudicate the cases sequentially; and that judges’ propensity to be lenient jumps up after a food break.”