Niejednolitość decyzji sędziowskich w przedmiocie wymiaru kary. Prezentacja wyników eksperymentu przeprowadzonego wśród zawodowych sędziów karnych metodą Daniela Kahnemana, Cassa Sunsteina, Davida Schkade i Ilany Ritov
Incoherence of Judges' Decisions on Punishments. Presentation of the Results of an Experiment Conducted with Professional Criminal Judges Using the Method Developed by Daniel Kahneman, Cass Sunstein, David Schkade and Ilana Ritov

Summary/Abstract: The author conducted empirical research on the coherence of actual decisions on the type and severity of punishments imposed by judges. The empirical analysis undertaken by the author had a dual structure. It consisted of an examination of court files of actual criminal cases and a questionnaire study conducted among professional criminal judges. The results of the questionnaire study are presented in this article. The questionnaire study was based on an empirical experimental model. Decisions made by judges during a laboratory simulation differ widely even though the facts and legal rules are the same. Judges do not coherently translate sentencing factors into specific criminal penalties. There is no common translation factor. What is more, judges' decisions differ depending on whether they are made in isolation or by comparison to cases belonging to another category.

• Details
• Contents