The psychology of defendant plea decision making.

Abstract

Every day, thousands of defendants, prosecutors, and defense attorneys must make guilty plea decisions, such as whether to accept a plea offer or proceed to trial. Most defendants opt to plead guilty; approximately 95% of state and federal convictions result from guilty pleas. In light of a newly emerging body of research and recent Supreme Court decisions on guilty pleas, this article asks and answers 2 questions: First, who pleads guilty and why? We describe the characteristics of those who are more or less likely to plead guilty, and examine the reasons why individuals plead guilty instead of proceeding to trial, exploring the cognitive, social influence, and developmental factors that underlie decision making. Second, are defendants' plea decisions valid, in that the decisions are made knowingly, intelligently, voluntarily, and with a factual basis of guilt? That is, do defendants who plead guilty understand and appreciate the conditions and consequences of their pleas, as required by law? Are innocent people induced to plead guilty to crimes they did not commit? We conclude with suggestions to move the field of plea research forward. (PsycINFO Database Record

Factors Predicting Conviction in Stranger Rape Cases

“…These two types of decision (the decision by a perpetrator to plead guilty and the decision by a jury to convict) may be influenced by different factors. For example, past research has found that, beyond the predominant factor of strength of evidence, the decision to go to trial versus plead guilty can be influenced by a range of normative cognitive- and social-based pressures such as defendant overconfidence or denial, loss aversion, or social validation—factors that jurors are not necessarily subject to (Redlich et al., 2017). In addition, the evidence for some factors (e.g., perpetrator alcohol/drug intoxication) being predictive of, or associated with, case outcome in rape comes solely from studies of mock jurors.…”

The promise of behavioral economics for understanding decision‐making in the court

“…Given that the decision involves choosing between a certain and a possible loss, we would expect defendants to opt for trial with the possibility of avoiding punishment, but they instead opt to take the certain punishment in the plea deal over the possible punishment at trial. Several scholars (Birke, ; Guthrie, ; Redlich, Bibas, Edkins, & Madon, ) have proposed framing as an explanation for this incongruence where the plea may be presented and interpreted as a gain over proceeding to trial and then risking a “trial tax.” This presentation of the plea as a gain then leads to risk‐averse choices as opposed to the otherwise expected risk‐seeking choice. Both components of this mechanism, however, need to be tested: whether courtroom actors frame pleas as gains and whether framing a plea as a gain would induce defendants to accept a guilty plea rather than proceed to trial.…”

Cognitive Theory and Plea-Bargaining

“…Gist processing is based on contextual and subjective mental representations, rather than being based on precise and objective facts. This means that rather than being rational decisions, plea decisions are likely to be influenced by decision biases (see also Redlich, Bibas, Edkins, & Madon, 2017).…”