Unconscious influences in sentencing decisions: a research review of psychological sources of disparity

Jane Goodman-Delahunty, Siegfried Ludwig Sporer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)19-36
Number of pages18
JournalAustralian Journal of Forensic Sciences
Volume42
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2010

Fingerprint

Psychology
Research
Terrorism
Jurisprudence
Crime
Observational Studies
Mortality
Unconscious (Psychology)
Body Physical Appearance

Cite this

@article{fb5b4447ed8b4c858771129339e7ab7d,
title = "Unconscious influences in sentencing decisions: a research review of psychological sources of disparity",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "Decision making, Extra-legal factors, Judges, Judicial discretion, Sentencing",
author = "Jane Goodman-Delahunty and Sporer, {Siegfried Ludwig}",
note = "Imported on 12 Apr 2017 - DigiTool details were: month (773h) = March 2010; Journal title (773t) = Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences. ISSNs: 0045-0618;",
year = "2010",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1080/00450610903391440",
language = "English",
volume = "42",
pages = "19--36",
journal = "Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences",
issn = "0045-0618",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "1",

}

Unconscious influences in sentencing decisions : a research review of psychological sources of disparity. / Goodman-Delahunty, Jane; Sporer, Siegfried Ludwig.

In: Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 42, No. 1, 03.2010, p. 19-36.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

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

VL - 42

SP - 19

EP - 36

JO - Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences

JF - Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences

SN - 0045-0618

IS - 1

ER -