Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Mapping Sentencing Research: What We Know, What We’re Missing, and Where to Go Next

Fri, September 5, 9:30 to 10:45am, Deree | Classrooms, DC 607

Abstract

Sentencing scholarship is shaped by disciplinary traditions, regional influences, and evolving policy debates, yet it remains fragmented across jurisdictions and research paradigms. This paper presents the key findings of an AI-assisted scoping literature review conducted as part of the ERC Starting Grant project Sentrix, highlighting dominant research themes, scholarly networks, and overlooked areas within the field.
Our analysis uncovers key themes in sentencing research, identifying areas that receive significant attention—such as discretion and disparities—alongside those that remain underexplored. By systematically mapping these themes, we assess the depth and breadth of scholarly engagement, examining whether specific methodologies are more commonly applied to particular themes, and how thematic emphases vary across sentencing systems. Additionally, we integrate insights from decision-making research and behavioural economics to position sentencing within a broader choice architecture framework, illustrating how cognitive biases and structural constraints shape judicial and prosecutorial decisions.
We also explore whether certain themes and methodologies emerge as universal aspects of sentencing research or are shaped by specific legal systems, highlighting what elements of sentencing scholarship are globally shared and which remain jurisdictionally distinct.
By mapping the intellectual landscape of sentencing research, this study identifies structural gaps, research biases, and interdisciplinary opportunities. Our findings contribute to fostering a more integrative and comparative approach to sentencing scholarship, paving the way for future collaborative research across disciplines and jurisdictions.

Authors