Research paper
Danziger S, Levav J, Avnaim-Pesso L. Extraneous factors in judicial decisions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2011 Apr 26;108(17):6889-92. doi:10.1073/pnas.1018033108. PMID: 21482790. PMCID: PMC3084045.
Why we cite it
Empirical test of the “what the judge ate for breakfast” hypothesis, analyzing 1,112 real parole decisions by 8 experienced Israeli judges across 50 days. The authors conclude that their ”findings suggest that judicial rulings can be swayed by extraneous variables that should have no bearing on legal decisions”: favorable rulings fell across each session and returned after a food break. Relevant to the project’s themes about how eating patterns may bear on decisions beyond nutrition. Contested on two fronts, and both are held here. `cdf04` (Weinshall-Margel & Shapard 2011, a letter) argues the case ordering was not random, which the causal reading depends on. And the paper frames its effect as mental or ego depletion, while `cwp08` (Hagger 2016), a 23-lab preregistered replication of the ego-depletion effect, found a pooled estimate indistinguishable from zero (d = 0.04). (Corrected 2026-09-10 from ”Demonstrates that consequential decisions are influenced by extraneous factors”, from ”contested by reanalyses”, when one letter is held, and from ”the broader principle of decision fatigue is well-supported”, which a held replication contradicts and which the paper never states: decision fatigue does not occur in it.)
”Landmark” removed (2026-09-06, card E1AWST). The design detail — 1,112 decisions, 8 judges, 50 days — is the checkable contribution, and this record already carries the reanalyses that contest the finding (one letter is held, `cdf04`; the plural is superseded, marked 2026-09-10 on the Research Assistant’s flag), which is the harder and better half.