The adage that justice depends on what the judge ate for breakfast may not be far from the truth, according to a study of more than a thousand court decisions.

The research, which examined judicial rulings by Israeli judges who presided over parole hearings in criminal cases, found that judges gave more lenient decisions at the start of the day and immediately after a scheduled break in court proceedings such as lunch. Jonathan Levav, associate professor of business at Columbia University, who co-authored the paper, said: "You are anywhere between two and six times as likely to be released if you're one of the first three prisoners considered versus the last three prisoners considered."

The authors of the peer-reviewed paper looked at more than 1,000 rulings made in 2009 by eight judges. They found that the likelihood of a favourable ruling peaked at the beginning of the day, steadily declining over time from a probability of about 65% to nearly zero, before spiking back up to about 65% after a break for a meal or snack.

Judges are more lenient after taking a break, study finds


Počúval som podcast o maníkovi, ktorý sa zmenil po operáciách mozgu. Pomohla mu, síce prestal trpieť epileptickými záchvatmi, no na druhej strane mal epizódy keď v noci sosal pedofilné porno. Nevedel prestať, namotával sa stále viac, až ho doma zbalili floydi, šiel na pár rokov sedieť, hoci jeho neurológ vysvetľoval, že obvinený za svoje činy nemohol byť zodpovedný. Že bol ok počas dňa a v práci mal nad svojím konaním plnú kontrolu, zmeny sa diali v noci, keď bol unavený a jeho mozog fungoval inak. Čosi ako keď osoba postihnutá alzheimerom je ráno úplne čulá a večer si nevie spomenúť na svoje meno. A ďalšie ráno je znovu schopná si spomenut na čokoľvek.

Biológ Robert Sapolsky tam rozvíjal teóriu, či vôbec existuje slobodná vôľa alebo je naše rozhodovanie podmienené biologicky