| Abstract [eng] |
It appears from the anchoring e.ect studies that the imprisonment sentence can be appointed arbitrarily because of the cognitive characteristics, not because of corruption or nuisance. However, compared with nearly 4 decades of research on the anchoring e.ect, its impact on the imprisonment sentence received relatively little attention. Since the severity of a imprisonment sentence is important both to the individual and society, we discuss the applicability of the amounted knowledge on the anchoring e.ect to the real sentencing decisions. Purpose – to present the results of the studies of the anchoring e.ect relevant to the imprisonment sentence, to reveal their strengths and weaknesses, and suggest new research directions. The method of this paper – literature review and analysis. Results. Research shows the potential in/uence of several types of anchors (accidental, environmentally suggested), mood and experience of the judge. Nevertheless, research has limitations: di.erent types of anchors acting in one judgment have been investigated separately, only standard anchoring procedure has been used, anchor consistent information (e. g. attorney’s closing speech) has been ignored as well as the amount of thought given to anchor, and in/uence of a person providing the anchor. Conclusions. We suggest future research perspectives: taking into account the speci-cs of the sentencing situation, investigate the interaction of di.erent types of anchors, explore the in/uence of both defence and prosecution attorneys’ closing speeches and their interaction, compare accidental anchor’s e.ects using standard and basic procedures, examine the elaboration of the anchor and social status of the person providing it. |
