IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ver/wpaper/03-2022.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Miscarriage of Justice in Judges' Mind: Theory and Experimental Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Stefania Ottone

    (University of Milan Bicocca)

  • Ferruccio Ponzano

    (University of Eastern Piedmont)

  • Margherita Saraceno

    (University of Pavia)

  • Luca Zarri

    (Department of Economics (University of Verona))

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate – both theoretically and by means of a controlled lab experiment – judges’ decisions when either “type-I” errors (i.e. convicting an innocent defendant) or “type-II” errors (i.e. acquitting a guilty defendant) can occur. Addressing this issue with field data is extremely challenging. Taken together, our findings indicate that participants are sensitive to both types of error, rather than to type-I avoidance only. Next, in both scenarios we interestingly detect “compensatory leniency” in judicial decision making, with participants seeming to balance the inherent trade-off between the errors by jointly managing the two key levers they are provided wiggle room on by our design: decision over (i) conviction/acquittal and (ii) severity of punishment. Finally, we show that participants are willing to pay to get further evidence and eliminate both type-I and type-II errors. We discuss implications of our core results for the design of behaviorally informed deterrence policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefania Ottone & Ferruccio Ponzano & Margherita Saraceno & Luca Zarri, 2022. "Miscarriage of Justice in Judges' Mind: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 03/2022, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ver:wpaper:03/2022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dse.univr.it/home/workingpapers/wp2022n3.pdf
    File Function: First version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Judicial Errors; Miscarriage of Justice; Economic Experiments; Law and Economics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law
    • K49 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Other
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ver:wpaper:03/2022. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Michael Reiter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isverit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.