• Korean Journal of Forensic Psychology
• /
• v.11 no.3
• /
• pp.329-347
• /
• 2020

When a person suggests an estimate under uncertainty, (s)he tend to rely on the information and number provided in advance. As a result, their final estimate would be assimilated to the initial value. This phenomenon is called "anchoring effect". The present research examined anchoring effects observed in law courts. Sentencing decision of jurors can be influenced by the sentence demanded by the prosecutor. Specifically, this study demonstrated the condition in which anchoring effect would be stronger and practical solutions for lowering anchoring effect. Study 1 demonstrated whether gravity of criminal cases and levels of anchor influenced anchoring effects. As expected, anchoring effect was stronger in a heavier criminal case than in a lighter one. When a low anchor was provided in a lighter case, anchoring effect was stronger compared to when a high anchor was provided. Study 2 examined how emotion affects anchoring effects. The results showed that anchoring effect appeared to be significantly stronger with feelings of anger than of sadness. Study 3 examined the solution for reducing anchoring effects in a court. When activation of selective-accessibility model was prevented, anchoring effects significantly decreased. These results can help solve the problems about juror judgmental bias and contribute to the development of Korean jury trial.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.43
• /
• pp.177-204
• /
• 2015

The Korean Criminal Code ${\S}10$ (1) provides that "The act of a person who, because of mental disorder, is unable to make discriminations or to control one's will, shall not be punished". Therefore, it'll not be able to be given criminal punishment if a mentally defective person is determined to lack the criminal liability. The problem about judging the criminal liability for the mentally defective person exists in areas where the criminal law intersects with psychiatry. Although the supreme court ultimately judges whether the criminal liability by mental defectiveness exists or not, the judgment of mental defectiveness, which is biological element, needs psychiatric knowledge and it is no wonder to rely on this. In particular, a change is required in the procedure and contents of mental examination for a mentally defective person as implementation of the Civil Participation in Criminal Jury Trial. It is needed the improvement of procedure to submit more accurate mental examination and the result of it in order that jurors are able to understand the result of mental examination and make an decision. This is because jurors consisting of ordinary citizens take part in trial. For guaranteeing the precise result of mental examination in the criminal justice procedure, it is necessary to establish the pool of manpower consisting of psychiatrists or psychologists who have completed the specific educational programs about the criminal justice and legal psychiatry, and it is desired to carry out the psychiatric test with selecting appraisers who belong to a pool of manpower. Furthermore, it is required to draw up and submit the written appraisal of mental examination which is easy to be known because of considering the nonprofessional of jurors consisting of ordinary citizens in the Civil Participation in Criminal Jury Trial. In order to gain a fair verdict of the jury about whether mental defectiveness exists or not, it is recommended the prompt submission of the written appraisal of mental examination, the presentation of the written appraisal of mental examination summarizing the important contents, and making out the written appraisal of mental examination for jurors to understand it easily.