被误导的关系：渐进决策模型与理性决策模型

理性决策模型曾经饱受林德布洛姆的批判.这些批判使不少人以为,渐进决策模型和理性决策模型只存在紧张的对立关系.事实上,尽管渐进决策模型是在对理性决策模型进行批判的基础上提出的,但是两者之间也存在着一定的相容关系.无论是从主要内容来看,还是从理论基础和现实基础来看,两者并不完全是对立关系,还存在着相一致的一面.     

Justice and economic decision making: A model of akrasia

Economics has provided the most rigorous model of decision making. Unfortunately, its severe rationality assumptions rule out psychological conflict. Modifying the standard model to allow for conflicting preferences creates scope for hesitation, doubt, regret, and akrasia. Akrasia, which is doing wrong knowingly, figures prominently in discussions of morality and justice in classical philosophy. The development of a formal model of akrasia along the lines taken in this essay holds the promise of combining the mathematical rigor of economics, the analytical power of philosophy, and the empirical methods of psychology in the study of justice.     

A normality bias in legal decision making

It is important to understand how legal fact finders determine causation and assign blame. However, this process is poorly understood. Among the psychological factors that affect decision makers are an omission bias (a tendency to blame actions more than inactions [omissions] for bad results), and a normality bias (a tendency to react more strongly to bad outcomes that spring from abnormal rather than normal circumstances). The omission and normality biases often reinforce one another when inaction preserves the normal state and when action creates an abnormal state. But what happens when these biases push in opposite directions as they would when inaction promotes an abnormal state or when action promotes a normal state? Which bias exerts the stronger influence on the judgments and behaviors of legal decision makers? The authors address this issue in two controlled experiments. One experiment involves medical malpractice and the other involves stockbroker negligence. They find that jurors pay much more attention to the normality of conditions than to whether those conditions arose through acts or omissions. Defendants who followed a nontraditional medical treatment regime or who chose a nontraditional stock portfolio received more blame and more punishment for bad outcomes than did defendants who obtained equally poor results after recommending a traditional medical regime or a traditional stock portfolio. Whether these recommendations entailed an action or an omission was essentially irrelevant. The Article concludes with a discussion of the implications of a robust normality bias for American jurisprudence.     

Juvenile court intake decision making: The importance of family affiliation

Based on an analysis of official records and systematic observations of intake hearings, this study empirically evaluates the criteria employed in determining whether a juvenile is petitioned to court for a formal hearing and if petitioned, whether he or she is held in preadjudicatory detention. Attention is paid to legal, social, demeanor-related, and demographic variables as they impinge on intake decision making. The major finding of this study is that the farther one goes into the intake decision-making process, the more does family disaffiliation become the prominent independent variable. The article places this area of research within relevant criminological paradigms (positivist, interactionist, neo- Marxist), summarizes the existing empirical findings, and integrates theory and evidence with the goal of producing a statement on this screening stage in the juvenile justice endeavor.     

The stalking victim's decision to contact the police: A test of Gottfredson and Gottfredson's theory of criminal justice decision making

There is a significant body of research exploring the reporting behaviors of crime victims. Much of this literature has focused on specific types of victimization (e.g., sexual assault) and the correlates of victim reporting. Recently, the crimes of stalking and cyberstalking have received empirical attention; however, few studies have examined the reporting behaviors of victims of these crimes. Using the theoretical framework proposed by Gottfredson and Gottfredson (1988), the current study explored how offense seriousness, the victim-offender relationship, and the prior record of the offender influenced a victim's decision to contact the police. Data were drawn from the 2006 stalking supplement to the National Crime Victimization Survey, which examined stalking in the United States. Results offered support to Gottfredson and Gottfredson (1988) and highlighted the significance of understanding the reporting behaviors for this sample of crime victims. Differences in reporting for victims of stalking and cyberstalking were also examined.     

Naturalistic decision making in forensic science: toward a better understanding of decision making by forensic team leaders

This study uses the naturalistic decision-making (NDM) perspective to examine how Dutch forensic team leaders (i.e., the officers in charge of criminal forensic research from the crime scene until the use of laboratory assistance) make decisions in real-life settings and identifies the contextual factors that might influence those decisions. First, a focus group interview was conducted to identify four NDM mechanisms in day-to-day forensic decision making. Second, a serious game was conducted to examine the influence of three of these contextual mechanisms. The results uncovered that forensic team leaders (i) were attracted to obtain further information when more information was initially made available, (ii) were likely to devote more attention to emotionally charged cases, and (iii) used not only forensic evidence in the decision making but also tactical, unverified information of the police inquiry. Interestingly, the measured contextual influences did not deviate significantly from a control group of laypeople.     

A decision problem of long-term economic planning

The model described in the present paper has been worked out to approximate a concrete problem of national economic planning. The problem presented itself in the daily practice of the National Planning Board of the Hungarian People's Republic in the course of a planning project carried out with the aim of laying the foundation of the national economy's long-term development.     

Race and decision making within juvenile justice: The importance of context

Previous tests of the influence of race on decision making within juvenile justice proceedings have traditionally focused on case-level variables and/or macrolevel factors that characterize the jurisdictions under study. Often excluded are measures of the attitudinal context within which decision making occurs. Using a revised conflict perspective that incorporates the role of racial stereotyping, hypotheses are developed centering on racial differences in case processing decisions within four midwest jurisdictions. Attitudes of juvenile court officials toward the punitiveness of the juvenile court and perceptions regarding differences between the behavior and attitudes of whites and those of African Americans are included in additive and race interactive models of five decision-making stages. Results indicate both lenient and harsh treatment of African Americans compared to whites. Hypotheses regarding racial stereotyping in the decision-making process receive some support and the discussion focuses on how inconsistent racial effects may be a function of variation in structural “coupling” across system decision points.     

Mental disorder and legal responsibility: The relevance of stages of decision making

The paper discusses the relevance of decision-making models for evaluating the impact of mental disorder on legal responsibility. A three-stage model is presented that analyzes decision making in terms of behavioral control. We argue that understanding dysfunctions in each of the three stages of decision making could provide important insights in the relation between mental disorder and legal responsibility. In particular, it is argued that generating options for action constitutes an important but largely ignored stage of the decision-making process, and that dysfunctions in this early stage might undermine the whole process of making decisions (and thus behavioral control) more strongly than dysfunctions in later stages. Lastly, we show how the presented framework could be relevant to the actual psychiatric assessment of a defendant's decision making within the context of an insanity defense.     

A comparison of insanity defense standards on juror decision making

Following the Hinckley acquittal, 17 states and the federal government made changes to the insanity defense, including revising the standard, reassigning the burden of proof, and altering the standard of proof. Two studies were conducted to determine whether the specific insanity standard (including the assignment of burden of proof and standard of proof) employed had a significant effect on mock jurors' verdicts. Participants' comprehension of insanity defense instructions was measured and the factors jurors used to decide whether to find the defendant not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) were also assessed. Participants' comprehension of insanity defense standards was very low. When asked to identify the factors they considered important in determining whether to find a defendant NGRI, only three elements of insanity defense standards were identified as significant. The results may have important implications for policy decisions regarding the insanity defense.     

The influence of prior record evidence on juror decision making

Several researchers have investigated the impact of evidence of prior convictions on jurors' decision making. Very little is known about a related issue, the impact of prioracquittal evidence introduced by the prosecution on jurors' decisions. The Supreme Court recently held (Dowling v. U.S., 1990) that the admission of prior acquittal evidence does not unfairly prejudice the defendant. We conducted a simulation study to examine the effects of prior record evidence (prior convictions, prior acquittals, and no prior record) on jurors' decisions. We also manipulated the presence of judicial instructions on the limited use jurors can make of extrinsic acts evidence. Mock jurors were more likely to convict the defendant when they had evidence of a prior conviction than when they had evidence of a prior acquittal or no record evidence. This effect was mediated by attributions about criminal propensity. Judge's limiting instructions were ineffective in guiding jurors' use of prior record evidence.     

Race and the decision making of juries

The relationship between race and jury decision making is a controversial topic that has received increased attention in recent years. While public and media discourse has focused on anecdotal evidence in the form of high‐profile cases, legal researchers have considered a wide range of empirical questions including: To what extent does the race of a defendant affect the verdict tendencies of juries? Is this influence of race comparable for jurors of different races? In what ways does a jury's racial composition affect its verdict and deliberations? The present review examines both experimental and archival investigations of these issues. Though the extant literature is not always consistent and has devoted too little attention to the psychological mechanisms underlying the influence of race, this body of research clearly demonstrates that race has the potential to impact trial outcomes. This is a conclusion with important practical as well as theoretical implications when it comes to ongoing debates regarding jury representativeness, how to optimize jury performance, jury nullification and racial disparities in the administration of capital punishment.     

The changing locus of decision making in the health care sector

In the 1970s, the health policy debate focused on whether government or the medical profession should control the health care system. This article asserts that that struggle between two forms of centralized control was both less promising and less consequential than the devolution of decision-making authority upon consumers and their agents that is occurring today and that seems likely to continue as competitive forces become stronger and opportunities for meaningful consumer choice increases. What we are witnessing is the simultaneous deprofessionalization and depoliticization of important decisions affecting health care, a decentralization and diversification of the system that is opening new possibilities for translating diverse consumer desires into provider performance. Although covering much familiar ground, this article links a variety of seemingly discrete issues under the sterility of the competition-versus-regulation debate and to show the historical and ethical significance of the major changes that are under way in the health care sector today.     

Penalty notices for disorder: influences on police decision making

This research examined, via a multi-method linked design, the influences over police decision making when disorderly behaviour is being dealt with in the context of a new type of offence disposal, the penalty notice for disorder (PND). The results of a multivariate analysis of the factors predicting the real-life issuance of PNDs to offenders formed the basis of an experiment (using serving police officers as participants) that probed officers’ decision-making processes in disorder scenarios. This approach presents an opportunity to gain insight into how police use the power of arrest when an alternate, less-punitive, option is available.