Most criminal court cases are resolved through a plea, yet the plea decision-making process remains largely unexplored in comparison to other phases of case processing. With defendants reliant on their defense attorney during the plea process, it stands to reason that the characteristics of the defense attorney would impact plea decision-making. To assess this possibility, we administered an experimental vignette to a national sample, manipulating defense attorney type, race, sex, experience, familiarity with other courtroom workgroup members, and empathy toward the defendant. We found that respondents were more likely to accept a plea offer if the defense attorney was experienced and empathic. When the defense attorney was private, experienced, familiar, or empathic, respondents rated their defense attorney as more qualified, which then influenced their acceptance of the plea offer. Uncertainty of the outcome, consequences of a plea, and reasonableness of the plea offer were the common motivators in decision-making.
AbramsD.HoggM. A. (1990). Social identification, self-categorization, and social influence. European Review of Social Psychology, 1, 195–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779108401862
2.
AlbonettiC. (1991). An integration of theories to explain judicial discretion. Social Problems, 38(2), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.2307/800532
3.
AlschulerA. (1975). The defense attorney’s role in plea bargaining. The Yale Law Journal, 84(6), 1179–1314. https://doi.org/10.2307/795498
4.
AnsolabehereS.SchaffnerB. F. (2014). Does survey model still matter? Findings from a 2010 multi-mode comparison. Political Analysis, 22(3), 285–303. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpt025
5.
AronowP. M.BaronJ.PinsonL. (2019). A note on dropping experimental subjects who fail a manipulation check. Political Analysis, 27, 572–589. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2019.5
6.
BakerT. (2017). Exploring the relationship of shared race/ethnicity with court actors, perceptions of court procedural justice, and obligation to obey among male offenders. Race and Justice, 7, 87–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/2153368716650728
7.
BakerT. (2018). Shared race/ethnicity with police and male offenders’ self-regulating beliefs: Exploring the salience of instrumental and normative factors for securing obedience. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 45(12), 19188–11935. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854818794228
8.
BakerT.GauJ. M. (2018). Female offenders’ perceptions of police procedural justice and their obligation to obey the law. Crime & Delinquency, 64, 758781. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128717719418
9.
BakerT.PelfreyW. V.Jr.BedardL. E.GertzM.GoldenK. (2014). Female inmates’ procedural justice perceptions of the police and courts. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 41, 144–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854813497479
10.
BakerT.PickettJ. T.AminD. M.GoldenK.DhunganaK.GertzM.BedardL. (2015). Shared race/ethnicity, court procedural justice, and self-regulating beliefs: A study of female offenders. Law & Society Review, 49(2), 433–465. https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12137
11.
BansakK. (2021). Estimating causal moderation effects with randomized treatments and non-randomized moderators. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society, 184(1), 65–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12614
12.
BibasS. (2004). Plea bargaining outside the shadow of trial. Harvard Law Review, 117(8), 2463–2547. https://doi.org/10.23074093404
13.
BlumbergA. (1967). The practice of law as confidence game: Organizational cooptation of a profession. Law and Society Review, 1(2), 15–40.
14.
BoccacciniM.BoothbyJ.BrodskyS. (2004). Development and effects of client trust in criminal defense attorneys: Preliminary examination of the congruence model of trust development. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 22, 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.584
15.
BodenhausenG.WyerR. (1985). Effects of stereotypes on decision making and information processing strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(2), 267–282. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.48.2.267
16.
BordensK. (1984). The effects of likelihood of conviction, threatened punishment, and assumed role on mock plea bargaining decisions. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 5(1), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp0501_4
17.
BordensK.BassettJ. (1985). The plea bargaining process from the defendant’s perspective: A field investigation. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 6(2), 93–110. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp0602_1
18.
BrinkM. (2019). Across the country public defenders take critical steps to end excessive caseloads. Criminal Justice, 34(3), 48–49.
19.
BushwayS. D.ForstB. (2013). Studying discretion in the processes that generate criminal justice sanctions. Justice Quarterly, 30, 199–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2012.682604
20.
BushwayS. D.RedlichA. (2012). Is plea bargaining in the “shadow of the trial” a mirage?Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 28, 437–454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-011-9147-5
21.
CasperJ. D.TylerT.FisherB. (1988). Procedural justice in felony cases. Law & Society Review, 22, 483–508. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053626
22.
ClairM. (2020). Privilege and punishment: How race and class matter in criminal court. Princeton University Press.
23.
ClairM. (2021). Being a disadvantaged criminal defendant: Mistrust and resistance in attorney-client interactions. Social Forces, 100(1), 194–217. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soaa082
24.
CohenT. (2014). Who is better at defending criminals? Does type of defense attorney matter in terms of producing favorable case outcomes. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 25(1), 29–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403412461149
25.
CoveyR. (2008). Reconsidering the relationship between cognitive psychology and plea bargaining. Marquette Law Review, 91(1), 213–247.
26.
DervanL.EdkinsV. (2013). The innocent defendant’s dilemma: An innovative empirical study of plea bargaining’s innocence problem. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 103, 1–48. https://doi.org/0091-4169/13/10301-0001
27.
EdkinsV. (2011). Defense attorney plea recommendations and client race: Does zealous representation apply equally to all?Law and Human Behavior, 35, 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-010-9254-0
28.
EisensteinJ.JacobH. (1977). Felony justice: An organizational analysis of criminal courts. Little, Brown, and Company, Inc.
29.
FlemmingR. B.NardulliP. F.EisensteinJ. E. (1992). The craft of justice: Politics and work in criminal court communities. University of Pennsylvania Press.
30.
FrenzelE. D.BallJ. D. (2008). Effects of individual characteristics on plea negotiations under sentencing guidelines. Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, 5, 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1300/J222v05n04_03
31.
GalanterM. (1974). Why the “haves” come out ahead: Speculations on the limits of legal change. Law & Society Review, 9, 95–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053020
32.
GomilaR. (2020). Logistic or linear? Estimating causal effects of experimental treatments on binary outcomes using regression analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 150(4), 700–709. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000920
33.
GrahamA.PickettJ. T.CullenF. T. (2021). Advantages of matched over unmatched opt-in samples for studying criminal justice attitudes: A research note. Crime & Delinquency, 67(12), 1962–1981. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128720977439
34.
HainmuellerJ.HangartnerD.YamamotoT. (2015). Validating vignette and conjoint survey experiments against real-world behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(8), 2395–2400. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1416587112
35.
HartleyR. D.Ventura MillerH.SpohnC. (2010). Do you get what you pay for? Type of counsel and its effect on criminal court outcomes. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(5), 1063–1070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2010.07.009
36.
HendersonK. S. (2019). Defense attorneys and plea bargains. In EdkinsV. A.RedlichA. D. (Eds.), A system of pleas: Social science’s contributions to the real legal system (pp. 37–55). Oxford University Press.
37.
HendersonK. S.LevettL. (2019). Plea bargaining: The influence of counsel. In MillerM. K.BornsteinB. H. (Eds.), Advances in psychology and law (Vol. 4, pp. 73–100). Springer.
38.
HendersonK. S.ShteynbergR. (2020). Plea decision-making: The influence of attorney expertise, trustworthiness, and recommendation. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 26(6), 527–551. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2019.1696801
Hoskins HaynesS.RubackB.CusickG. R. (2010). Courtroom workgroups and sentencing: The effects of similarity, proximity, and stability. Crime & Delinquency, 56, 126–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128707313787
41.
HuangF. L. (2019). Alternatives to logistic regression models in experimental studies. Journal of Experimental Education, 90(1), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2019.1699769
42.
JohnsonB. D.LarrouletP. (2019). The “distance traveled”: Investigating the downstream consequences of charge reductions for disparities in incarceration. Justice Quarterly, 36(7), 1229–1257. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2018.1529250
43.
KelloughG.WortleyS. (2002). Remand for plea: Bail decisions and plea bargaining as commensurate decisions. British Journal of Criminology, 42, 186–210. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/42.1.186
LeeJ.JaynesC.RoppJ. (2021). Satisfaction, legitimacy, and guilty pleas: How perceptions and attorneys affect defendant decision-making. Justice Quarterly, 38(6), 1095–1127. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2020.1786147
46.
LindE. A.TylerT. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. Springer Science & Business Media.
47.
MacKinnonD. P.PirlottA. G. (2015). Statistical approaches for enhancing causal interpretation of the M to Y relation in mediation analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19, 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868314542878
48.
MetcalfeC. (2016). The role of courtroom workgroups in felony case dispositions: An analysis of workgroup familiarity and similarity. Law & Society Review, 50, 637–673. https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12217
49.
MetcalfeC. (2021). Toward a method for evaluating court actor influences on plea negotiations: A preliminary exploration of public defenders. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 39(3), 345–357. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2517
50.
MetcalfeC.ChiricosT. (2018). Race, plea, and charge reduction: An assessment of racial disparities in the plea process. Justice Quarterly, 35(2), 223–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2017.1304564
51.
MetcalfeC.PickettJ. (2021). Public fear of protestors and support for protest policing: An experimental test of two theoretical models. Criminology, 60(1), 60–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12291
52.
MontgomeryJ. M.ByhanB.TorresM. (2018). How conditioning on posttreatment variables can ruin your experiment and what to do about it. American Journal of Political Science, 62(3), 760–775. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12357
NorrisR. J.MullinixK. J. (2020). Framing innocence: An experimental test of the effects of wrongful convictions on public opinion. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 16, 311–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-019-09360-7
56.
QuickelE.ZimmermanD. (2019). Race, culpability, and defendant plea-bargaining decisions: An experimental simulation. Journal of Forensic Psychology Research and Practice, 19(2), 93–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/08839514.2018.1517294
57.
RedlichA. D.BushwayS. D.NorrisR. J. (2016). Plea decision-making by attorneys and judges. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 12, 537–561. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-016-9264-0
58.
RedlichA. D.ShteynbergR. (2016). To plead or not to plead: A comparison of juvenile and adult true and false plea decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 40, 611–625. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000205
59.
SimmonsA. D.BoboL. D. (2015). Can non-full-probability internet surveys yield useful data? A comparison with full-probability face-to-face surveys in the domain of race and social inequality attitudes. Sociological Methodology, 45(1), 357–387. https://doi.org/10.1177/0081175015570096
60.
SociaK. M.RydbergJ.DumC. P. (2021). Punitive attitudes toward individuals convicted of sex offenses: A vignette study. Justice Quarterly, 38(6), 1262–1289. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2019.1683218
61.
SteffensmeierD.UlmerJ.KramerJ. (1998). The interaction of race, gender, and age in criminal sentencing: The punishment cost of being young, black, and male. Criminology, 36(4), 763–798. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.1998.tb01265.x
62.
TestaA.JohnsonB. D. (2020). Paying the trial tax: Race, guilty pleas, and disparity in prosecution. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 31(4), 500–531. https://doi.org/10.1177/00887403419838025
63.
TylerT. R. (2006). Why people obey the law. Princeton University Press.
64.
TylerT. R.HuoY. J. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and the courts. Russell Sage Foundation.
ViljoenJ.KlaverJ.RoeschR. (2005). Legal decisions of preadolescent and adolescent defendants: Predictors of confessions, pleas, communication with attorneys, and appeals. Law and Human Behavior, 29(3), 253–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-005-3613-2
WilfordM.SutherlandK.GonzalesJ.RabinovichM. (2021). Guilt status influences plea outcomes beyond the shadow-of-the-trial in an interactive simulation of legal procedures. Law and Human Behavior, 45(4), 271–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000450
70.
WilfordM.WellsG.FrazierA. (2021). Plea-bargaining law: The impact of innocence, trial penalty, and conviction probability on plea outcomes. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 46, 554–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09564-y
71.
WilfordM.ZimmermanD.YanS.SutherlandK. (2021). Innocence in the shadow of COVID-19: Plea decision making during a pandemic. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 27(4), 739–750. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000367
72.
WilliamsM. R. (2002). A comparison of sentencing outcomes for defendants with public defenders versus retained counsel in a Florida circuit court. Justice System Journal, 23(2), 249–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/0098261X.2002.10767668
73.
WilsonT. (2019). The promise of behavioral economics for understanding decision-making in the court. Criminology & Public Policy, 18, 785–805. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12461
74.
WolfeS. E.NixJ.KaminskiR.RojekJ. (2016). Is the effect of procedural justice on police legitimacy invariant? Testing the generality of procedural justice and competing antecedents of legitimacy. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 32, 253–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-015-9263-8
YouGov. (2017). Survey procedures: Information related to the treatment of human subjects. https://research.yougov.com.
77.
ZimmermanD.HunterS. (2018). Factors affecting false guilty pleas in a mock plea bargaining scenario. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 23, 53–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12117
78.
ZottoliT.Daftary-KapurT. (2019). Guilty pleas of youth and adults: Differences in legal knowledge and decision making. Law and Human Behavior, 43(2), 166–179. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000314
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
