Framing Effects and the Decision to Accept a Plea Deal

• In Event: Decision Making of Criminal Justice Actors

Abstract

Well over 90% of convictions result from a defendant accepting a guilty plea. With prior research suggesting that individuals typically display risk-seeking behavior in the domain of losses, a potentially innocent defendant accepting a guilty plea, rather than incurring the risk of trial, seems at odds with the behavioral economics literature. Birke (1999) suggests that defendants may be viewing the plea as a gain, potentially making them more risk-averse. The current study explores how the way a plea bargain is framed impacts the likelihood of plea acceptance. 501 undergraduate students from three east-coast universities completed a survey in which they were presented with three plea bargaining scenarios with the guilty plea framed as a gain, loss, or as neutral. Framing was randomized across respondents with the scenarios varying in the likelihood of acquittal and the guilt or innocence of the respondent. Preliminary findings suggest differential effects of framing where framing the plea decision as a gain induces guilty pleas more frequently from the innocent but less frequently from the guilty. These results remain true even when controlling for demographic characteristics, cognitive reflection test scores, and risk orientation measures. Implications for theory and policy are discussed.

Authors

• Theodore Wilson, University at Albany - SUNY School of Criminal Justice

• Laura Dykstra, Plymouth State University