David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In contrast with the common assumption in the plea bargaining literature, we show fairness-related concerns systematically impact defendants' preferences and judgments. In the domain of preference, innocents are less willing to accept plea offers (WTAP) than guilty defendants and all defendants reject otherwise attractive offers that appear comparatively unfair. We also show that defendants who are uncertain of their culpability exhibit egocentrically biased judgments and reject plea offers as if they were innocent. The article concludes by briefly discussing the normative implications of these findings.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Christian Thorne (2009). The Dialectic of Counter-Enlightenment. Harvard University Press.
Lee S. Weinberg & Richard E. Vatz (1982). The Insanity Plea: Szaszian Ethics and Epistemology. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 3 (3):417-433.
Pamela Hieronymi (2004). The Force and Fairness of Blame. Philosophical Perspectives 18 (1):115–148.
Alan G. Sanfey (2009). Expectations and Social Decision-Making: Biasing Effects of Prior Knowledge on Ultimatum Responses. [REVIEW] Mind and Society 8 (1):93-107.
Andrea Isoni (2011). The Willingness-to-Accept/Willingness-to-Pay Disparity in Repeated Markets: Loss Aversion or 'Bad-Deal' Aversion? Theory and Decision 71 (3):409-430.
Richard L. Lippke (2008). To Waive or Not to Waive: The Right to Trial and Plea Bargaining. [REVIEW] Criminal Law and Philosophy 2 (2):181-199.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-05-10
Total downloads1 ( #302,008 of 1,017,892 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?