Thinking and Learning

A choice is framed in terms of losses

People seek evidence that confirms what they already believe

A decision is influenced by the first piece of information given

A person avoids risk when outcomes are described as gains

Framing the crime as more or less severe

Telling judges the crime occurred in a different jurisdiction

Varying the sentence demanded by the prosecutor (anchor)

Changing the guilt verdict

Judges’ sentences shifted toward the sentencing demand, even when it was extreme

Judges’ sentences were unaffected by the prosecutor’s request

Judges consistently gave lower sentences than both anchors suggested

Judges always gave harsher sentences when the crime description was more emotional

Because it proves that prosecutors always exaggerate sentence demands

Because it shows that judges are deliberately biased toward prosecutors

Because it shows that expert decision-makers can be unconsciously swayed by irrelevant numbers

Because it suggests that sentencing laws are fundamentally inconsistent

The tendency to favor information that supports existing expectations

The tendency to change one’s belief when confronted with new evidence

The tendency to recall neutral evidence more than extreme evidence

The tendency to make decisions based only on first impressions

It leads to more accurate predictions in uncertain situations

It increases objectivity in evaluating opposing viewpoints

It prevents individuals from fairly considering contradictory evidence

It ensures that experts apply legal guidelines consistently