THE PSYCHOLOGY OF PERSUASIVE PRECEDENT

29 Pages Posted: 17 Jun 2024

Date Written: June 07, 2024

Abstract

Adherence to precedent is a bedrock principle in a common law judicial system. Public support for courts depends upon many factors, including the perception that they are stable institutions that adhere to their own rules. Courts that ignore precedent risk undermining the legitimacy of the judicial system. That said, judges must also have the ability to make independent choices. This article presents an empirical study of the influence of non-binding, or persuasive, precedent on 952 sitting judges. We gave the judges one of four hypothetical cases, each of which contained configurations of persuasive precedent. We found that: (1) judges largely ignored a single non-binding precedent; (2) judges were more likely to make decisions that were consistent with three non-binding precedents; and (3) judges also tended to make decisions consistent with three non-binding precedents, even when they were accompanied by a fourth inconsistent non-binding precedent. Overall, the portrait of judicial reliance on non-binding precedent appears sensible, but less than optimal.

Suggested Citation

Rachlinski, Jeffrey John and Wistrich, Andrew J., THE PSYCHOLOGY OF PERSUASIVE PRECEDENT (June 07, 2024). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4857987 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4857987

Jeffrey John Rachlinski (Contact Author)

Cornell Law School ( email )

Myron Taylor Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853-4901
United States
607-255-5878 (Phone)
607-255-7193 (Fax)

Andrew J. Wistrich

California Central District Court ( email )

Los Angeles, CA 90012
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
24
Abstract Views
154
PlumX Metrics