Computing Pareto‐optimal Predictor Composites for Complex Selection Decisions

A complex selection situation encompasses vacancies for several different positions and applicants that apply simultaneously for one or several of these positions. This article presents an analytic method for estimating the expected selection quality, as well as the adverse impact ratio of these complex selections, when the decisions are based on a single predictor composite score. In addition, the method is integrated within a broader decision‐making framework for designing complex selection decisions that show a Pareto‐optimal balance between the selection quality and diversity goals. Finally, the decision aid is used to demonstrate the importance of applying the appropriate selection format (either the simple or the complex format) when exploring the front of Pareto‐optimal outcomes of planned selections.     

The influence of decision task and deliberation style on the verdict of the juries

The influence of decision task and deliberation style on the verdict of the juries. In the Kameda's Deliberation Style Model the emission of verdicts of responsibility when the deliberation style of the juries (elemental/compound) and the type of decision task (disjunctive/conjunctive) are jointly manipulated, is favoured in certain conditions. Given the consequences that these approaches could have in real judicial processes, this model is analyzed using a manslaughter crime under the Spanish judicial context conditions (nine members juries and seven or five members majorities emitting a verdict of guilty or not guilty, respectively). The obtained results indicated a better operation of the model when a conjunctive decision task was demanded.     

Of witches,madmen, and products liability: An historical survey of the use of expert testimony

The United States Supreme Court's recent decision in Daubert v. Mewell Dour Pharmaceutical Inc. has focused attention on judicial treatment of expert testimony. A survey of the development of the forensic use of such testimony helps to explain the salient characteristics of modem American practice. The survey, in the context of medical experts, discloses a several centuries long trend toward an adversarial approach that places selection, preparation, and presentation of expert witness testimony ever more completely in the hands of the litigants. This trend has been challenged since at least the 1800s by those desiring an inquisitorial alternative featuring court's witnesses or neutral panels of experts. These proposals have generally been rejected. Daubert represents a modest step in the direction of greater judicial control of the presentation of expert evidence but raises questions about the evenhandedness of heightened judicial scrutiny of proffered expert testimony.     

Improving comprehension of jury instructions with audio‐visual presentation

This study examined whether mock‐jurors' comprehension of judicial self‐defence instructions improved when an audio‐visual instructional format involving computer animations and a flow chart was used. In a mock‐juror paradigm, 90 law students (experts) and 90 legally untrained adults (novices) were randomly allocated to one of three instructional conditions (audio, audio‐elaborated, audio‐visual). Dependent measures of self‐defence comprehension included verdict delivery, multiple‐choice (recognition), paraphrasing (recall) and novel scenarios (transfer). Law students performed better on self‐defence comprehension tests than novices in the audio‐only conditions. The audio‐visual format significantly enhanced novices' comprehension, with their comprehension scores matching those of law students. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The potential conflict between clinical and judicial decision making heuristics.

The Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale (GSS; Gudjonsson, 1984) was introduced as a tool for identifying suspects who are at risk of making false confessions. High GSS-scores indicate a greater risk of making false confessions. Recently, some authors have claimed that low GSS-scores can be used to support the credibility of recovered memories. This new application broadens the use of the GSS in two ways. First, low GSS-scores are considered to possess diagnostic value. Second, the GSS is advocated as a practical tool in clinical settings. This article critically evaluates such a clinical application of the GSS. Our main argument has to do with the incompatibility of basic clinical and judicial decision making heuristics. Psychotherapists, and other medical professionals, should base their decisions on different parameters than judicial professionals. Compared to judicial heuristics, clinical heuristics can be characterized as more empathetic, less critical, and less conservative. Given these differences, clinical conclusions (including those about the accuracy of recovered memories) cannot be easily translated into judicial decisions. If they do enter the judicial domain, these conclusions may lead to dubious forensic decisions.     

Down the Garden Path: The Role of Conditional Inference Processes in Self‐Persuasion

In a controlled experiment, information format and prior knowledge of risk‐related decision attributes altered the response to decision conflict produced by negatively correlated attributes (NCA) in choice under uncertainty. When dominated choice alternatives were presented in a format in which the displayed attributes were not negatively correlated, decision makers used a simple choice process based on the displayed information. This allowed them to detect the dominated alternatives, regardless of their prior knowledge. However, when the same alternatives were presented in a format in which the displayed attributes were negatively correlated, the more‐knowledgeable decision makers used a compensatory choice process based on the displayed attributes and, consequently, missed the dominated alternatives. The less‐knowledgeable participants, who were unable to use the displayed attributes because of their lack of expertise, calculated the nondisplayed attributes and detected the dominated alternatives. With NCA, the more‐knowledgeable participants followed a conflict‐resolution strategy using the displayed NCAs, whereas the less‐knowledgeable individuals followed a conflict‐avoidance strategy using the uncorrelated, nondisplayed attributes that inadvertently revealed the dominance structure of the decision. The implications of person factors for the effects of NCA and in other types of decisions with NCA are discussed.     

Utilizing probabilities as decision weights in closed and open information boards: A comparison of children and adults

Decisions in preschoolers (6 years), elementary schoolers (9.7 years), and adults (21 years) were studied with an information board crossing three probabilistic cues (validities: .83, .67, .50) with two options. Experiment 1 (n = 215) applied a standard version of the information board (closed presentation format), in which information must be searched sequentially and kept in mind for the decision. Experiment 2 (n = 217) applied an open format (Glöckner & Betsch, 2008), in which all information was visible during decision making. Elementary schoolers but not preschoolers benefited from an open format — indicated by an increase in using probabilities as decision weights. In the open but not closed format, choices were biased by normatively irrelevant information (the lure). Variations in the prediction patterns of the cues influenced decisions in all age groups. Effects for presentation format, pattern, and lure jointly indicate that even children are capable of considering multiple information in their decisions.     

Score blending: How scale response grouping biases perceived standing

Numerical values—from test scores to credit scores—inform us of our relative standing and can shape our decisions. The values are usually presented in a continuous format (which places scores on a single line) or a grouped format (which separates scores into several score groups). We investigate whether and how the presentation format affects one's perception of their standing in a distribution and subsequent decision making. We show that when values are grouped, individuals merge the values within each group, a phenomenon we term score blending, which leads to an underweighting of intragroup score shifts and an overweighting of intergroup score shifts. Across six studies (N = 2,108) and a variety of paradigms (e.g., test taking and financial decision making), we observe robust effects of score blending, even when score groups are explicitly described as meaningless and generated randomly. The effect persists when the score is merely recalled without the scale present and can bias key decision parameters with behavioral consequences.     

Stakes and risk: Incapacitative intent in sentencing decisions

Measures of seriousness of the conviction offense and prior criminal record are strong correlates of sentences. This is consistent with a desert orientation to sentencing. Competing sentencing theories emphasize concepts of risk and incapacitation, but their roles in sentencing decisions have received less attention. This study focused on judicial risk assessments and on the concept of stakes. Both variables plausibly are related to incapacitative intents of judges. Our hypotheses that the risk and stakes measures used are relatively independent and correlated with, and have an interaction effect on, decision outcomes were supported. Both judges' assessments of risk and our stakes scale accounted for substantial variation in the decision to incarcerate. Time actually served in confinement also was related substantially to stakes, risk, and their interaction. Implications of the stakes and risk concepts for future guidelines development and decision study in criminal justice are discussed.     

Formal aspects of Legal reasoning

This paper discusses the functions of deductive justification in ideal reconstructions of judicial reasoning. It departs from the point of judicial reasoning: explaining and justifying the judicial decision. It argues that deductive validity is not enough for good judicial argument. On the other hand, deductive justification is necessary, not only for easy cases but for hard cases as well. It draws some consequences for the concept of jumps in legal reasoning and for the traditional distinction between internal and external justification.     

"EXTRACTING" POLICY FROM JUDICIAL OPINIONS: THE DANGERS OF POLICY CAPTURING IN A FIELD SETTING

Policy-capturing techniques have been used to assess factors thought to influence judicial decisions relevant to human resource management. This article explains why the "advice" offered human resource management practitioners and others based on these studies can be incomplete and misleading. Substantive knowledge needed to independently evaluate research involving judicial decision making in field settings is provided. Five dangers associated with the use of policy capturing in the context indicated are identified, discussed, and then illustrated. Alternative research investigating the role of legal inputs in HRM using lawyers as subject matter experts is suggested.     

Bringing the behavioral sciences to the law: Tell it to the judge or talk to your legislator?

The empirical data generated by behavioral scientists is frequently targeted for presentation in courts in order to influence decision making. However, legislative bodies, rather than the courts, may be the most appropriate forum to consider such evidence. This article discusses the comparative reception of social science evidence in judicial versus legislative arenas.     

Framing of decisions under ambiguity

This paper reports three experiments that illustrate framing of decision problems due to Ellsberg (1961) in which probabilities are ambiguous. Although the standard Ellsberg problems often induce violations of Savage's sure-thing principle, framing of the equivalent problems in a sequential format reduces these violations. Nevertheless, this has an ironic consequence of introducing another inconsistency in the decision makers' choices: An inconsistency between the standard and sequential formulations of the Ellsberg problems.     

The right to refuse treatment: Paradox,pendulum and the quality of care

This clinical and theoretical overview of the right to refuse treatment will address some of the themes that have dominated this area of interface between psychiatry and the law, and have, perhaps, obscured the real concern of the right to refuse treatment question; i.e., the issue of quality of care. Central themes include factors present in the medicolegal context and recent events, origin of the concept of the right to treatment, the separation of confinement from treatment, and the changing models of vicarious decision making. This review also addresses judicial conceptualizations of treatment, including the concept of quarantine, judicial risk-aversiveness, and judicial fantasies of drug action. Some possible directions for the future are also examined.     

Preference reversals are diminished when gambles are presented as relative frequencies

Preference reversals are a well-documented example of suboptimal decision making. Typical preference reversals experiments have involved monetary bets presented in probability format. Research on other examples of decision making have shown that irrational or suboptimal choices are diminished or eliminated entirely when the probabilities are presented as relative frequencies (e.g., Gigerenzer & Hoffrage, 1995). The aim of the present experiment was to determine if the way in which information is presented to participants affects participants' preferences. When the options were presented in the standard probability format 59% of participants' preferences were reversed. However, reversals were significantly decreased in the frequency format group, with only 40% of participants' responses being inconsistent. Although preference reversals were not eliminated when the gambles were presented as frequencies they were significantly diminished and may not be such a robust example of irrational decision making after all.     

Perspectives on Psychology and Law

The past decade saw an explosive growth in psychological research on law (particularly the judicial process) that continues unabated. This article presents an intellectual history of this research and a critical assessment of its contemporary developments. It begins by tracing four stages in the relations between psychology and law that serve to place present scholarship in perspective. Then follow two sections consisting of conceptual, methodological, and jurisprudential critiques of two topics, respectively, that traditionally have been and still remain at the center of research attention: the pretrial phase of the criminal process (eyewitness identifications) and the criminal trial itself (jury selection, jury decision making, and presentations of evidence and law to the jury). Finally, some themes are culled from past and present experience that capture the mood, difficulties, and prospects of applying psychology to the law. The purpose of this theoretical overview of the field is to suggest some insights into two recurrent questions: why has psychological research not had more of an impact on the judicial process, and what can be done about it?     

Information presentation format moderates the unconscious-thought effect: The role of recollection

The unconscious-thought effect occurs when distraction improves complex decision-making. In two experiments using the unconscious-thought paradigm, we investigated the effect of presentation format of decision information (i) on memory for decision-relevant information and (ii) on the quality of decisions made after distraction, conscious deliberation or immediately. We used the process-dissociation procedure to measure recollection and familiarity. The two studies showed that presenting information blocked per criterion led participants to recollect more decision-relevant details compared to a presentation by option. Moreover, a Bayesian meta-analysis of the two studies provided strong evidence that conscious deliberation resulted in better decisions when the information was presented blocked per criterion and substantial evidence that distraction improved decision quality when the information was presented blocked per option. Finally, Study 2 revealed that the recollection of decision-relevant details mediated the effect of presentation format on decision quality in the deliberation condition. This suggests that recollection contributes to conscious deliberation efficacy.     

‘The witness who saw, /he left little doubt’: a comparative consideration of expert testimony in mental disability law cases in common and civil law systems

The question of how courts assess expert evidence—especially when mental disability is an issue—raises the corollary question of whether courts adequately evaluate the content of the expert testimony or whether judicial decision making may be influenced by teleology (‘cherry picking’ evidence), pretextuality (accepting experts who distort evidence to achieve socially desirable aims), and/or sanism (allowing prejudicial and stereotyped evidence). Such threats occur despite professional standards in forensic psychology and other mental health disciplines that require ethical expert testimony. The result is expert testimony that, in many instances, is at best incompetent and at worst biased. The paper details threats to competent expert testimony in a comparative law context—in both the common law (involuntary civil commitment laws and risk assessment criminal laws) and, more briefly, civil law. We conclude that teleology, pretextuality, and sanism have an impact upon judicial decision making in both the common law and civil law. Finally, we speculate as to whether the new United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is likely to have any impact on practices in this area. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

DISCUSSION PROCEDURES AND DECISION-MAKING PERFORMANCE

This study sought to obtain empirical data that either directly supports or refutes the “functional” perspective advanced by recent group decision-making theorists. Specifically, the study attempted to test the general claim that the group's satisfaction of critical task-achievement functions (or requisite conditions) is a better predictor of decision-making performance than the discussion procedures it employs in arriving at a decision. A total of 48 three-member groups were randomly assigned to one of four different discussion formats. The groups were trained to use their assigned format in arriving at a decision regarding a human relations case. Two-way ANOVA revealed no significant main effect for “discussion format,” but a significant main effect for “satisfaction of requisite conditions.” No interaction effect was discovered. The findings thus offer strong support for the “functional” perspective. Other analyses indicated that the satisfaction of certain requisite conditions may be more important than others in determining group decision-making success.