NCJ Number
73753
Journal
ARCHIV FUER PSYCHOLOGIE Volume: 129 Issue: 2 Dated: (1977) Pages: 110-119
Date Published
1977
Length
10 pages
Annotation
The validity of claims that the North American adversary system reveals more useful information and facilitates better judicial decisions than the West German inquisitorial system is assessed.
Abstract
According to the theory of cognitive dissonance as applied to the West German court system, judges are supplied information prior to court proceedings and are therefore likely to interpret the presentation at trial according to preformed hypotheses. Usually they strongly suspect that the accused is guilty and ignore information not in conformance with that belief while accepting questionable information which tends to support the hypotheses. To test the validity of this theory, 5 fictional court cases were presented to 40 legal trainees and to 40 non-legal students. Half the group was provided with 20 selected items of information prior to the simulated proceedings and half was not. Results indicate that trial information supporting innocence. However, information reviewed prior to court proceedings seems to reduce distortions in information evaluation, especially in the case of trained lawyers. The question of whether the adversary system is superior to the inquisitorial system remains open. But it can be concluded that thorough knowledge of briefs relating to cases contributes to the fairness of decisions, and that legally trained individuals are not prejudiced by their experience. Tables and a 20-item bibliography are supplied.