Thesis
Role of the anchoring effect and narrative priming in sentencing decisions
Master of Science (M.S.), Drexel University
Dec 2021
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17918/00000934
Abstract
Judicial decision-makers are often tasked with determining outcomes in both civil and criminal cases. Because judicial decision-makers have to consider a great deal of information in making judgments, they are likely to rely on cognitive heuristics to decrease cognitive load when they are unsure of the "correct" decision. The cognitive heuristics of anchoring and availability are particularly relevant in influencing judicial decision-makers because this population is often exposed to both number and narrative primers. This study examined whether and to what extent the anchoring effect and narrative priming impact judges' (n = 218) and the general public's (n = 115) decision-making when provided with a sentencing vignette. Four independent-samples t-tests were conducted comparing juror low anchor vs. juror high anchor, judge low anchor vs. judge high anchor, juror nonviolent narrative vs. juror violent narrative, and judge nonviolent narrative vs. judge violent narrative. Results of this study indicate the presence of an anchoring effect in juror populations, although judges appear to be less susceptible than juror samples. Additionally, results found no noticeable impact of narrative priming on either judicial or juror sentencing decisions.
Metrics
65 File views/ downloads
118 Record Views
Details
- Title
- Role of the anchoring effect and narrative priming in sentencing decisions
- Creators
- Kellie M. Wiltsie
- Contributors
- David S. DeMatteo (Advisor)
- Awarding Institution
- Drexel University
- Degree Awarded
- Master of Science (M.S.)
- Publisher
- Drexel University; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
- Number of pages
- 52 pages
- Resource Type
- Thesis
- Language
- English
- Academic Unit
- Psychological and Brain Sciences (Psychology); College of Arts and Sciences; Drexel University
- Other Identifier
- 991016453358704721