Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5d6d958fb5-mhr6q Total loading time: 0.4 Render date: 2022-11-26T14:03:17.918Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": false, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

4 - Algebraic models of juror decision processes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2010

Reid Hastie
Affiliation:
University of Colorado, Boulder
Get access

Summary

The use of algebraic equations to describe mental processes has been common in psychology since the field became an empirical science. The earliest experimental psychologists utilized algebraic equations to describe the translation of physical stimulation into subjective experience (e.g., Fechner, 1860/1966). Today psychologists use equations to describe many aspects of thought and behavior, ranging from the most peripheral sensory processes of “early vision” to elaborate cognitive processes in problem solving and decision making.

The basic image of the decision maker according to the algebraic modeling approach is a “judgmental accountant” who converts all information relevant to a judgment into numbers representing the implications of each piece of evidence and the importance that should be accorded to each of them and then calculates a weighted sum to provide a “bottom line” evaluation. Benjamin Franklin advised his friends to make decisions using a “prudential algebra” and described it as an accountant tabulating credits and debits to determine the ultimate value of a course of action or choice alternative (in Bigelow, 1887, p. 522). Another image of this process is a physical device that determines the center of gravity of a balance beam from which hang weights (weight represents the implication or “scale value” of an item of evidence) that pull the beam down on the left or right (direction represents guilt or innocence) according to their location on the beam (distance from the fulcrum represents credibility, relevance, or importance of the evidence).

Type
Chapter
Information
Inside the Juror
The Psychology of Juror Decision Making
, pp. 84 - 115
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)
18
Cited by

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×