Cue theory in judicial decisions

Moreover, this consistency extended beyond the most important attributes throughout the entire list. Table 3 presents Spearman rank order correlations between product attribute consideration in a purchase decision and attribute importance as a cue to quality, computed across all attributes for each of the five product categories. Clearly, the relationships are fairly strong, indicating a general tendency for consumers to use as cues to product quality those product attributes which are important considerations in purchase decisions, or vice versa.

Cue theory in judicial decisions

Cue theory suggests that perception is based on the combination of sensory data in the form of cues and cognitive processing. It is a conceptually driven or "top down" process that relies on the knowledge and experience found in the mind of the perceiver Allard, The mind will go beyond the information that is given to create a familiar image or pattern, demonstrating that the power of perception is greater than that of sensation.

Top down processing is generally observed in visuall illusions where two patterns are perceived in one, or where a pattern is perceived in one with no obvious features.

The mind will pick up on available cues and fill in the blanks to perceive an image or pattern that is not necessarily there.

This happens without the conscious effort of the perceiver and is described as an "unconscious inference" Allard, It is this summation of cues to form an incorrect perception that often leads to the phenomenon of "mistaken for game".

What is "Mistaken for Game"? This happens when hunters neglect to clearly identify their target and then "seem to shoot at shape, sound or colour" Carnachan, which Green also describes as snapshooting; when shooters see a target, perceive it as prey and fire within one continuous movement.

Cue theory is present in these situations because "the eye sees something and in a flash the brain fills in the missing pieces" Carnachan, Victims will enforce the incorrect identification by moving through the bush like and imitating the sounds of the prey.

Often when one hunter shoots another, it is a result of the victim having been acting or dressing in colours like the prey or when a carcass is being carried over the shoulder of the hunter Green, A possible cause that may strengthen incorrect identification in turkey shooting, maybe a parallel to "Buck Fever", which is "a psychological state whereby the hunters desire to shoot their quarry is so strong that it overrides all rational thinking" Carnachan, These are real world situations that demonstrate findings by Bruner and Potter who concluded that people will make inferences about what they are seeing, and the earlier the inference is made, the stronger the perception will become Allard, Experienced hunters believe that they are familiar with cues as to what is a turkey in the bush, so when they see a movement, they expect it and perceive it to be a turkey.

They will continue to believe this until they receive disconfirming evidence, but often the victims strengthen the incorrect perception by acting like a turkey. How can this be Avoided? Research has shown that wearing hunter orange will significantly reduce the number of mistaken for game accidents; from toof the hunters shot, were not wearing orange clothing compared to people who were Green, DECLARATION.

Student number: I declare that Inconsistency In Judicial Decisions: The Right To Life In Perspective is my own work and that all the sources that I have used or quoted have been indicated and acknowledged by means of complete references. texts continue to use cue theory to explain certiorari decision making,2 recent empirical research indicates a new interest in other aspects of this process.3 .

Rational Choice/ Game Theory Judges are ration policy or preference maximizers, and they make strategic decisions based on the context and the expected decision of other relevant agents Judicial decisions are influenced by a combination of personal attitudes and their colleagues.

A Utilitarian Theory of Judicial Decision Thomas Morawetz University of Connecticut School of Law judges or one seeking criteria for what counts as justification for judicial decisions. I shall take it as the latter, as a question about the criteria by which judicial decisions are to .

Concern for Policy Outputs as a Cue for Supreme Court Decisions on Certiorari an explanation of certiorari decision-making based on cue theory. They hypothesized that judges used some method of separating those petitions which required serious attention from those that were frivolous and that a readily identifiable group of cues exists.

prosecutorial decisions with judicial review of administrative regulations, however, the breadth of prosecutorial discretion stands out, even though the separation of .

Cue theory in judicial decisions
aggressive cue theory - oi