‘Guilty, no doubt’: detention provoking confirmation bias in judges’ guilt assessments and debiasing techniques

This research examines whether judges’ pretrial detention decisions trigger confirmation bias in their guilt assessments. It also tests two strategies to mitigate confirmation bias: (1) to have different judges decide about detention and guilt and (2) to reduce cognitive load by structuring the eval...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Lidén, Moa (Author)
Contributors: Gräns, Minna ; Juslin, Peter
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: 2019
In: Psychology, crime & law
Online Access: Volltext (Resolving-System)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 173644624X
003 DE-627
005 20201023094221.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 201023s2019 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1080/1068316X.2018.1511790  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)173644624X 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP173644624X 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
100 1 |a Lidén, Moa  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
109 |a Lidén, Moa 
245 1 0 |a ‘Guilty, no doubt’  |b detention provoking confirmation bias in judges’ guilt assessments and debiasing techniques 
264 1 |c 2019 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a This research examines whether judges’ pretrial detention decisions trigger confirmation bias in their guilt assessments. It also tests two strategies to mitigate confirmation bias: (1) to have different judges decide about detention and guilt and (2) to reduce cognitive load by structuring the evaluation of evidence. In Experiment 1, Swedish judges (N = 64) read 8 scenarios in which they either decided themselves about detention or were informed about a colleague's decision. Then, participants rated the defendant's trustworthiness, the strength of each piece of evidence, the total evidence and decided about guilt. In Experiment 2, Law students (N = 80) either first rated each piece of evidence separately and then the total evidence (structured evaluation) or only the total evidence (unstructured evaluation), and then decided about guilt. Overall, detained defendants were considered less trustworthy and when participants themselves detained, they rated the guilt consistent and total evidence as stronger and were more likely convict, compared to when a colleague had detained. The total evidence was considered stronger after unstructured than structured evaluations of the evidence but the evaluation mode did not influence guilt decisions. This suggests that changing decision maker holds greater debiasing potential than structuring evidence evaluation. 
650 4 |a Confirmation bias 
650 4 |a Debiasing 
650 4 |a Detention 
650 4 |a Guilt 
650 4 |a Judge 
700 1 |a Gräns, Minna  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Juslin, Peter  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Psychology, crime & law  |d Getzville, NY : HeinOnline, 1994  |g 25(2019), 3, Seite 219-247  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)341903574  |w (DE-600)2070124-X  |w (DE-576)27234995X  |x 1477-2744  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:25  |g year:2019  |g number:3  |g pages:219-247 
856 4 0 |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2018.1511790  |x Resolving-System  |3 Volltext 
936 u w |d 25  |j 2019  |e 3  |h 219-247 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 3785069014 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 173644624X 
LOK |0 005 20201023094221 
LOK |0 008 201023||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-21-110  |c DE-627  |d DE-21-110 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-21-110 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a krub  |a krzo 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw