Englich and Mussweiler (2001)


• Aim: 

  To investigate the effect of a prosecutor's sentencing recommendation (anchor) on judges' sentencing decisions.
• Participants: 

  19 young trial judges (15 male, 4 female), average age 29.37, average experience 9.34 months.
• Procedure:

  1. Independent samples design with two conditions: high anchor (34 months) and low anchor (2 months)
  2. Participants given a rape case to review
  3. After forming an opinion, given prosecutor's sentencing recommendation
  4. Asked to make sentencing decision and answer follow-up questions
• Results:

  • Low anchor condition (2 months): Average sentence 18.78 months (SD = 9.11)
  • High anchor condition (34 months): Average sentence 28.70 months (SD = 6.53)
• Conclusion: 

  The prosecutor's recommended sentence significantly influenced judges' sentencing decisions, demonstrating anchoring bias.
• Strengths:

  1. Experimental design: Allows for causal inferences about the effect of anchoring.
  2. Ecological validity: Uses realistic case materials and actual judges as participants.
  3. Control measures:

  • Pilot study with law students to establish reasonable anchors
  • Use of experienced judges to develop case materials

  1. Measurement of additional variables: Certainty and perceived realism of the case.
• Limitations:

  1. Sample size and composition: Small sample (n=19) with limited experience, reducing generalizability.
  2. Independent samples design: Participant variability could influence results.
  3. Gender imbalance: Predominantly male sample may not represent all judges.
  4. Artificial setting: Laboratory conditions may not fully reflect real courtroom decision-making.
  5. Limited scope: Focuses on one type of case (rape) and specific anchor values.