SIGNAL: Stanford Interdisciplinary Group in Neuroscience and Law
May 26, 2011 5:15pm - 6:45pm
Does what the judge ate for breakfast really make a difference? A paper published recently in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences presents evidence of "extraneous" factors in judicial decision-making. The authors examined over 1000 parole decisions made by a set of Irsaeli judges, and report the striking result that favorable decisions drop from approximately 65% to nearly zero within a given session, as another food break approached. Come discuss the study and its potential implications for legal theory and practice, and eat and drink with us! All are welcome.