Judicial Decision-Making

1. Front Matter

   Pages i-viii

   PDF

2. Introduction: Judging Is Human

   • Jeffrey J. Rachlinski

   Pages 1-5

3. What Do We Mean by Precedent? Empirical Evidence of Ordinary Usage

   • Priscila C. de Andrade, Guilherme F. C. F. de Almeida, Ivar R. Hannikainen, Noel Struchiner

   Pages 7-24

4. Reasonableness on the Clapham Omnibus: Exploring the Outcome-Sensitive Folk Concept of Reasonable

   • Markus Kneer

   Pages 25-48

5. “That’s Him!”: Evaluating a Guilt Hypothesis in the Context of a Suspect Lineup

   • Moa Lidén

   Pages 49-78

6. Debiasing Numerical Verdicts and Judicial Discretion: Reflections on Mitigating the Anchoring Effect in Judicial Decision-Making

   • Maciej Próchnicki, Bartosz Janik, Piotr Bystranowski

   Pages 79-103

7. Truth, Probability, and Evidence in Judicial Reasoning: The Case of the Conjunction Fallacy

   • Gustavo Cevolani, Vincenzo Crupi

   Pages 105-121

8. An Analytic Framework for Research on Judicial Decision-Making

   • Wessel Wijtvliet

   Pages 123-157

9. Hercules on a Diet

   • Inbar Levy

   Pages 159-177

10. The Challenges of Artificial Judicial Decision-Making for Liberal Democracy

    • Christoph K. Winter

    Pages 179-204Open Access

11. Correction to: The Challenges of Artificial Judicial Decision-Making for Liberal Democracy

    • Christoph K. Winter

    Pages C1-C1Open Access

This book shares state-of-the-art insights on judicial decision-making from both theoretical and empirical perspectives. It offers in-depth coverage of the forefront of the field and reviews the most important issues and discussions connected with an empirical approach to judicial decision-making. It also addresses the challenges of judicial psychology to the ideal of rule of law and explores the promise and perils of applying artificial intelligence in law. In closing, it offers empirically-driven guidance on ways to improve the quality of legal reasoning.

Chapter “The Challenges of Artificial Judicial Decision-Making for Liberal Democracy” is available open access under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License via link.springer.com. 

• Judicial Decision Making
• Cognitive Biases
• Empirical Legal Studies
• Experimental Jurisprudence
• Legal Decision Making
• Interdisciplinary
• Legal Phiosophy

• Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland

  Piotr Bystranowski, Maciej Próchnicki

• University of Silesia in Katowice, Katowice, Poland

  Bartosz Janik

Piotr Bystranowski is an assistant professor at the Interdisciplinary Centre for Ethics at the Jagiellonian University. His research interests include philosophy of criminal law, judicial decision-making, computational methods in law and philosophy.


Bartosz Janik is an adjunct professor at the Faculty of Law and Administration at the University of Silesia in Katowice. His research interests include analytical philosophy of law, judicial decision making and philosophy of psychiatry.


Maciej Próchnicki is a PhD Candidate at Jagiellonian University, where he prepares a dissertation about issuing numerical verdicts in legal proceedings. His research interests include topics at the intersection of legal and cognitive sciences, especially judicial decision making.

Policies and ethics