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.

Police Officer Perceptions of Non-consensual Dissemination of Intimate Images

“…Different cultural characteristics may influence perceptions of offenders and victim-blaming and may be particularly relevant to perceptions of sex offenses. The literature on perceptions of NCII is limited, and future research on the issue is needed among laypersons and professional alike, assessing the various extralegal factors that may influence forensic decisions (for a review of these factors, see Goodman-Delahunty and Sporer, 2010).…”

Letting the Field Show us the Way – a Mixed Methodology to Understand Judicial Decision Making

“…This approach might imply the problem of not been able to reveal what underlies those decisions, which is our main purpose. As advocated by Goodman-Delahunty and Sporer [16] "concerns have been raised that reasons articulated in judicial decisions are crafted to withstand appeal and to fit the parameters of model defensible legal guideline judgments, but may not correspond with the decision making process itself" (p.20).…”

“…These studies usually focused on finding discrimination, disparity or even discretion in criminal judgements. These classical studies frequently looked for the impact that several characteristics fro m the offender (age, gender, race and socio-economic status, among others) but also related to the sentencer (fro m personal attitudes to penal philosophies), the victim and the context may have over sentencing decisions (see [16] for a review).…”

“…So me studies have been focusing in the influence of some offender characteristics such as their physical appearance, their facial exp ressions, their emotional behaviours, etc. [16]. Other crit icis m to the experimental studies is that they often use law students' samples or other indiv iduals that aren't judges.…”

Effects of Male Defendants’ Attractiveness and Trustworthiness on Simulated Judicial Decisions in Two Different Swindles

“…This “attraction-leniency effect” was later observed in the actual court trials in which physical attractiveness ratings showed significant negative correlations with the severity of the sentences imposed by professional judges (Stewart, 1980, 1985). However, the effect of facial attractiveness on legal judgments can be tempered by the nature of the crimes (Sigall and Ostrove, 1975; Smith and Hed, 1979; Goodman-Delahunty and Sporer, 2010). According to Sigall and Ostrove (1975), the leniency effect was only expected in crimes (for example, burglary) that were unrelated to facial attractiveness.…”