How do Judges think about risk?

A sample of almost 100 judges exhibited well-known patternsof biases in risk beliefs and reasonable implicit values oflife. These biases and personal preferences largely do not affectattitudes toward judicial risk decisions, though there are someexceptions, such as ambiguity aversion, misinterpretation ofnegligence rules, and retrospective risk assessments in accidentcases, which is a form of hindsight bias. Although judges avoidedmany pitfalls exhibited by jurors and the population at large,they nevertheless exhibited systematic errors, particularlyfor small probability-large loss events. These findings highlightedthe importance of judicial review and the input of expert riskanalysts to assist judicial decisions in complex risk cases.