Choice Shifts and Extreme Behavior: Judicial Review in the Federal Courts

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Research on the group-induced choice shift has made two recent advances. First, there has been an initial indication that group-induced shifts may exist in real-world decision-making settings. And second, group discussion has been found to have a polarizing effect, moving members to take more extreme positions. The present research was designed to build upon these two recent advances. In a real-world natural experiment setting, the decisions of federal judges were examined. These decisions were all in response to a challenge to the constitutionality of a state or federal statute or governmental policy. Judges were faced with a choice between a cautious alternative (upholding the validity of the statute or policy) and an extreme alternative (striking down the statute or policy, declaring it null and void). The data indicated that federal judges were more likely to select the extreme course of action after participating in group discussion than when facing similar situations individually.

This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit: