The human element in judicial decision-making The role of personal attitudes

The dissertation aims to gain insight into the role personal attitudes play in the professional judicial decision-making process. It builds on (i) insights from legal theory on the human element of judicial decision-making and on judicial impartiality, and (ii) what is known from psychological research about the role personal attitudes play in daily decision-making. Based on these theoretical perspectives it can be argued that empirical research on what role judges’ personal attitudes have in their decision-making is lacking.
77 semi-structured interviews were held with Dutch first instance court judges from three different district courts and from all areas of law. The results of these interviews provided insight into whether judges think personal attitudes play a role in their decision-making, and if so, how, and into whether judges experience a conflict between their personal attitudes and their impartiality.
Additionally, an experimental vignette study was conducted to explore if, in an experimental setting, attitudes would be present when judges rule in a fictitious case and whether this has a direct effect on the decisional outcome.
This dissertation underlines the importance of personal attitudes in the judicial decision-making while at the same time presenting a more intricate picture of their role. It opens a critical conversation about acknowledging and addressing the human element within judicial reasoning, aiming to foster a judicial process that is as fair and unbiased as humanly possible.