How do judges judge?Do they apply law to facts in a mechanical and deliberative way, as the formalists suggest they do, or do they rely on hunches and gut feelings, as the realists maintain?Debate has raged for decades, but researchers have offered little hard evidence in support of either model.Relying on empirical studies of judicial reasoning and decision making, we propose an entirely new model of judging that provides a more accurate explanation ofjudicial behavior.Our model accounts for the tendency of the human brain to make automatic, snap judgments, which are surprisingly accurate, but which can also lead to erroneous decisions.I Equipped with a better understanding ofjudging, we then propose several reforms that should lead to more just and accurate outcomes.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 335 citations exist upstream.