TY - JOUR
T1 - Unconscious influences in sentencing decisions
T2 - a research review of psychological sources of disparity
AU - Goodman-Delahunty, Jane
AU - Sporer, Siegfried Ludwig
N1 - Imported on 12 Apr 2017 - DigiTool details were: month (773h) = March 2010; Journal title (773t) = Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences. ISSNs: 0045-0618;
PY - 2010/3
Y1 - 2010/3
N2 - Drawing on theoretical insights from basic psychological research, influences sourced in unanticipated or extra-legal aspects of criminal cases that can influence sentencing decisions are reviewed. Findings from empirical studies of observed disparities in sentencing decisions are summarized, including archival data, observational studies, field research and experimental investigations of simulated sentencing decisions. A criterion for inclusion was that the factor had to exert an influence outside the conscious awareness of the judge. The paper examines the effects on sentencing of some traditional extra-legal factors, such as judge and offender gender, as well as less traditional elements, such as the judge's attitudes and sentencing philosophy, the physical appearance of the offender, unforeseeable consequences of the crime, and reactions to acts of terrorism. Four sources of potential bias are distinguished: (a) features associated with the judge; (b) features associated with the offender, (c) unanticipated or remote consequences of the offence, and (d) contextual information at the time of the sentencing decision that heightens awareness of mortality. The effectiveness of sentencing reforms to reduce disparities arising from unconscious factors is discussed. The purpose of this review is to advance understanding of the psychology of sentencing and increase judicial and public awareness of unconscious biases and disparities in sentencing determinations.
AB - Drawing on theoretical insights from basic psychological research, influences sourced in unanticipated or extra-legal aspects of criminal cases that can influence sentencing decisions are reviewed. Findings from empirical studies of observed disparities in sentencing decisions are summarized, including archival data, observational studies, field research and experimental investigations of simulated sentencing decisions. A criterion for inclusion was that the factor had to exert an influence outside the conscious awareness of the judge. The paper examines the effects on sentencing of some traditional extra-legal factors, such as judge and offender gender, as well as less traditional elements, such as the judge's attitudes and sentencing philosophy, the physical appearance of the offender, unforeseeable consequences of the crime, and reactions to acts of terrorism. Four sources of potential bias are distinguished: (a) features associated with the judge; (b) features associated with the offender, (c) unanticipated or remote consequences of the offence, and (d) contextual information at the time of the sentencing decision that heightens awareness of mortality. The effectiveness of sentencing reforms to reduce disparities arising from unconscious factors is discussed. The purpose of this review is to advance understanding of the psychology of sentencing and increase judicial and public awareness of unconscious biases and disparities in sentencing determinations.
KW - Decision making
KW - Extra-legal factors
KW - Judges
KW - Judicial discretion
KW - Sentencing
U2 - 10.1080/00450610903391440
DO - 10.1080/00450610903391440
M3 - Article
SN - 0045-0618
VL - 42
SP - 19
EP - 36
JO - Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences
JF - Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences
IS - 1
ER -