The Psychology of Trial Judging

Trial court judges play a crucial role in the administration of justice for both criminal and civil matters. Although psychologists have studied juries for many decades they have given relatively little attention to judges. Recent writings, however, suggest increasing interest in the psychology of judicial decision making. This essay reviews several selected topics where judicial discretion appears to be influenced by psychological dispositions, but cautions that a mature psychology of judging field will need to consider the influence of the bureaucratic court setting in which judges are embedded, their legal training, and the constraints of legal precedent. Trial judges are on the front line of civil and criminal disputes. At early stages of litigation they make rulings about relevant law bearing on the dispute: e.g., about whether a plea bargain is acceptable; about who has standing to sue; whether the court has jurisdiction; whether the litigation is “ripe” for further attention by the court; whether the claims have merit; or whether a statute of limitations is or is not applicable. Trial judges also manage settlement conferences, approve plea bargains and preside over jury trials. Often they serve as the primary fact finder instead of a jury. Trial judges also render