55 Pages Posted: 6 Sep 2010 Last revised: 14 Feb 2013
Date Written: February 11, 2013
The “anchoring effect” is a cognitive bias by which people evaluate numbers by focusing on a reference point – an anchor – and adjusting up or down from that anchor. Unfortunately, people usually do not sufficiently adjust away from their anchors, so the initial choice of anchors has an inordinate effect on their final estimates. More than 90% of all criminal cases are resolved by plea bargains. In the vast majority of those cases, the prosecutor makes the initial plea offer, and prosecutors often make high initial offers. Assuming that the prosecutor’s opening offer operates as an anchor, nearly all criminal cases in this country produce unjust results based upon an unconscious cognitive bias.
This article thus proposes a solution that most jurisdictions have rejected: Judges should be able to participate in the plea discussions. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1) and most state counterparts strictly preclude judges from participating in plea discussions, but a few jurisdictions permit judicial participation. In these jurisdictions, plea discussions commence with the prosecutor and defense counsel laying out their cases and asking for particular dispositions and the judge responding with the expected post-plea sentence. This article contends that this type of judicial participation would reduce the anchoring effect because the expected post-plea sentence would replace the prosecutor’s opening offer as the anchor and produce fairer final plea bargains. This article also argues that such judicial participation would ameliorate many of the problems associated with the current plea bargaining system.
Keywords: Plea Bargaining, Anchoring Effect
JEL Classification: K14, K42
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Miller, Colin, Anchors Away: Why the Anchoring Effect Suggests that Judges Should be Able to Participate in Plea Discussions (February 11, 2013). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1672442 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1672442