The ‘hungry judge effect’

Sir, – Writing about the prospect of judges being replaced by artificial intelligence, Colin Walsh appears to confuse the traits of being human with being humane (Letters, May 4th). It is probably fair to say that, were they synonymous, only one form would be in use. To be humane is largely seen as an attribute, and there is no reason it cannot be a characteristic of a codified inanimate system, such as a well-designed educational or exercise programme. Conversely, when we say that we are human, we are usually admitting to an error or failure.

His view that “if a judge is inhumane and cruel that is a failure of the justice system. He or she should not have been made a judge” is presumably true. It is not, however, in any sense a solution to anything and, even then, it is simplistic. The greater concern ought to be of the individual’s consistency.

A famous example of this, sometimes called the “Hungry judge effect” has been found to influence the likelihood of parole being awarded, from over 50 per cent at the commencement of a session to very low chances before a meal break. It then returned to about 65 per cent after food was consumed. The original studies by Danziger and colleagues are widely cited, including by Daniel Kahneman in his popular writing on human psychology. It is one of a plethora of cognitive biases that affect normal people.

Software which aids judges in decision-making is already in use in the US. Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions (Compas) uses a mathematical algorithm to predict the probability of reoffending. It is intended to assist judges in deciding on parole or sentencing. While it’s tempting, especially given the amount of crime in the United States, to dismiss the value of any such system, it is likely that they can offer greater consistency and allow the detection of cognitive biases, such as those involving race, age, gender and so on. It’s also likely that, as with other technology, it can improve rapidly and that future generations of the system will outdo the current iteration. An inherent problem with being human is that the degree to which you are humane will vary. This occurs in ways unrelated to the defendant, client, customer or patient in front of you. And simply knowing this fact doesn’t prevent it. – Yours, etc,