The best and worst times to have your case reviewed by a judge

Recently, I’ve been working my way through Daniel Kahneman’s fascinating book on human decision making, “Thinking, Fast and Slow.” In the third chapter, Kahneman discusses how external factors can affect our tendency to fall back on easy “default” decisions instead of taking a few minutes to think the decision through. To drive his point home, he provides one disturbing example from a research article published in PNAS a few years ago.

In this article, the researchers analyzed 8 experienced judge’s decisions on parole requests as a function of time of day. The judges reviewed about 35 cases per day, spending about 6 minutes on each case. On average, the judges approved only 36% of the parole requests presented to them each day, so the chances of having a positive judgement on your case are already bleak.

Now, we’d expect judges — of all people — to be the best at making impartial decisions. If no external factors were affecting their decisions, we’d expect to see them consistently approving about 36% of the parole requests throughout the day.

Let’s take a look at what the researchers found.

judge_decisions_fig1

Proportion of parole requests approved as a function of what order they were reviewed in.
Each tick on the x-axis denotes every third case.
Circles denote when the judges took a food break. Source

Shockingly, the judges appear to be much more inclined to approve a parole request when they’ve just come off a break. In contrast, they reject far more requests than usual the closer they get to break time — and nearly 100% of the requests just before they take a break.

This study provides a classic example of depletion effects in human judgement, a theory which suggests that we have a limited amount of mental energy to expend during a working period. The longer we work on mentally strenuous tasks, the more mental energy we expend, and eventually we’ll run out and start falling back to these easy — and often wrong — default decisions.

In the judges’ case, once a sufficient number of cases had worn them down, they started defaulting to rejecting every case put in front of them until it was break time. That means that perfectly eligible prisoners had to spend even more time in prison because the judge hadn’t eaten his mid-morning snack.

Yet more proof that humans don’t make decisions in a vacuum: even missing breakfast can alter how you approach the day.

The take-away here?

  • Try your best to be seen by judges first thing in the morning or just after lunch.
  • Take regular snack breaks throughout your workday; the longer you work without a break, the worse you perform.

Randy is a PhD candidate in Michigan State University's Computer Science program. As a member of Dr. Chris Adami's research lab, he studies biologically-inspired artificial intelligence and evolutionary processes.

Posted in data visualization, review Tagged with: , , , ,
  • nobody

    I wonder about the BMI of these judges.

    I like your conclusions, but the might only apply to overweight, older men with blood-sugar issues. Insulin resistance can be a bear, and make you perform sub-optimal compared to a normal non-diabetic who doesn’t need a snack.

    • http://www.randalolson.com Randy Olson

      I don’t think they looked at the weights of the judges, but 6 of the judges were males and 2 were female. You can find more details in the open access article.

  • Alex

    I fell for the sexy appeal of this study, then half way through writing about it, I realized that the study missed a very mundane explanation for the striking results.

    Explanation here: http://priceonomics.com/justice-isnt-blind-its-cranky-by-5pm/

    • http://www.randalolson.com Randy Olson

      That’s an interesting explanation that I’ve heard a couple times since posting this. People with good lawyers (and therefore good chances of having a positive decision on their case) tend to go first after the break. Thanks for linking it!

  • Pingback: Neeks Reads 8/26/14 | neekstape.com()

  • Lorenzo Ruzzene

    Cool! Just wondering, the judge can’t decide which cases to deal with? I mean, starting the day with the “easiest” ones, for example?

    • http://www.factfrontier.com Fact Frontier

      Regardless of the order in which the judge deal with the cases, the bias remains. But seeing that even simple mental tasks such as chosing which links to click exhausts mental power, I would prefer judges to do difficult cases first and then easy cases when bloodsugar is low.

  • http://chadgelinas.com/?p=52 Theda

    Thanks forr your personal marrvelous posting!

    I truly enjoyed reading it, you are a great author. I will always bookmark your blog aand will eventually come
    back someday. I want to encourage you to definitely continue your great posts, have
    a nice day!

    Look aat mmy website: bbest seo company long beach (Theda)

  • asdf 323

    The judge at 5pm does not want to make the mistake of releasing a dangerous criminal. He has no time to read the documentation. To protect his social position he will prefer to err on the side of caution.

  • Seth

    That is NOT the only possible explanation – I’ll give you a few off the top of my head: Judges get frustrated with seeing so many criminals, and tend to be harsher the more they see. Judges tend take breaks after they’ve seen people they judge negatively. Judges set easy cases (either the easy paroles or rejections) at the start/end of their shifts. There I’m sure exist better explanations too. You’ve shown a correlation, you’re overextending by claiming causality.

  • Pingback: The best and worst times to have your case reviewed by a judge | Viral Internet URL()

  • John Doe

    As a practicing attorney, I think the ultimate conclusion is correct, but the data does not necessarily support it. In my experience, cases are decided in descending order of the amount of time they are expected to take, with the most contentious ones decided last. The easy ones are decided first, and in cases of parole decisions, since there is zero incentive for an inmate to agree not to be paroled, the first cases decided will be those where there is an agreement by the state to parole. Once those are done, the hard ones, where it is less likely that parole will be granted are heard.

    The list basically re-sets after each break as deals are worked out.

    Again, as a practicing attorney, I agree with the conclusion, but not with the suggestion that this data necessarily supports it.

  • Pingback: Los jueces también se equivocan por el cansancio()

  • Pingback: 28/08/14 | todaywelearned()

  • Pingback: Judges’ Level of Empathy Correlated with Time of Day | gold is money()

  • Pingback: Breaks Matter | Reference Notes()

About this blog

The data visualizations on this blog are the result of my “data tinkering” hobby, where I tackle a new data analysis problem every week. If I find something interesting, I report my findings here to share with the world.

If you like the work in this blog, I'm currently available for hire as a freelancer. Send me an email if you'd like to discuss freelance work.

If you would like to use one of my graphs on your website or in a publication, please email me.

Archives

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.