DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Anchoring Effect of the Prosecutor's Demand on Sentence: Evidence from Korean Sexual Crime Cases

  • Received : 2016.11.09
  • Published : 2017.08.31

Abstract

The anchoring effect can be found when a decision shows cognitive prejudice towards the initial information given. Several studies have argued that such an effect is present even for judges in the courtroom. This paper seeks to find a relationship between judges' decisions on penalty sentences and the sentences recommended by prosecutors. In this study, 2,773 actual court cases are considered in the analysis, and quantile regression is used to show that the sentencing decisions judges make are anchored by the recommendations of prosecutors. However, this reliance on recommendations differs according to the seriousness of the crime committed. Specifically, at the lowest penalty levels, a one-month increase in the prosecutors' sentencing recommendation results in a 0.25-month increase in the judges' sentence, while at the highest sentence level, the judges' sentences increase by 0.78 months under an identical condition. The results of this research indicate the need to create more objective and clear sentencing guidelines in the future in an effort to mitigate the psychological pressure experienced by judges with regard to serious offences or heinous crimes.

Keywords

References

  1. Hastie, R., D. A. Schkade, and J. W. Payne. 1999. "Juror Judgments in Civil Cases: Effects of Plaintiff's Requests and Plaintiff's Identity on Punitive Damage Awards." Law and Human Behavior 23 (4).
  2. Hinsz, V. B. and K. E. Indahl. 1995. "Assimilation to Anchors for Damage Awards in a Mock Civil Trial." Journal of Applied Social Psychology 25 (11).
  3. Kim, Cheong-tag and In-chol Choi. 2010. "Cognitive Biases in Judicial Decision Making." The SNU Law Research Institute 51 (4) (in Korean).
  4. Kim, Jungwook and Subok Chae. 2011. Sentence Variation and Influence of Prosecutor's Demand. Supreme Prosecutors' Office (in Korean).
  5. Koenker, R. and G. Basset. 1978. "Regression Quantiles." Econometrica 46 (1).
  6. Lee, Min-sik. 2006. "Sentencing Differences among Homicide Cases." Korean Criminological Review 17 (4) (in Korean).
  7. Lee, Min-sik, Jung-sik Gong, and Soo-jung Lee. 2009. "Age and Sentencing Disparities among Murderers: An Examination of Nonlinear Effects." The Korean Association of Criminology 21 (1) (in Korean).
  8. Lee, Min-sik and Mi-rang Park. 2010. "Study on Improvement of the Current Sentencing Standards and Analysis of Its Current Status: Based on the Statistical Analysis." Supreme Prosecutor's Office (in Korean).
  9. Lee, Young-rahn. 1988. "Empirical Study of the Factors Influencing on the Sentence Disposition." The Korean Association of Criminology 3 (in Korean).
  10. Malouff, J and Nicola S. Schutte. 1989. "Shaping Juror Attitudes: Effects of Requesting Different Damage Amounts in Personal Injury Trials." The Journal of Social Psychology 129 (4).
  11. Martin, Eugenio Garrido, and Carmen Herrero Alonso. 1997. "Influence of the Prosecutor's Plea on the Judge's Sentencing in Sexual Crimes: Hypothesis of the Theory of Anchoring by Tversky and Kahneman." In edited by S. Redondo, V. Garrido, J. Perez, and R. Barberel. Advances in Psychology and Law: International Contributions. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
  12. Park, Gwang-bae, Sang-joon Kim, and Mi-young Han. 2005. "Effects of Cognitive Heuristics on the Decisions of Actual Judges and Mock Jury Groups for Simulated Trial Issues." Korean Journal of Psychological and Social Issues 11 (1) (in Korean).
  13. Robbennolt, J. and C. A. Studebaker. 1999. "Anchoring in the Courtroom: The Effects of Caps on Punitive Damages." Law and Human Behavior 23 (3).
  14. Supreme Prosecutors' Office. 2011. Sentence Variation and Influence of Prosecutor's Demand
  15. Viscusi, W. K. 2001. "The Challenge of Punitive Damages Mathematics." The Journal of Legal Studies 30.
  16. 양형위원회. 2007-2010. 양형위원회 연간보고서.