Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Argumentation and Intuitive Decision Making: Criminal Sentencing and Sentence Indication

  • Conference paper
Book cover AI Approaches to the Complexity of Legal Systems. Models and Ethical Challenges for Legal Systems, Legal Language and Legal Ontologies, Argumentation and Software Agents (AICOL 2011)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 7639))

Abstract

This paper investigates criminal sentencing in the Australian State of Victoria in particular the intuitive nature of the decision making and the difficulties of representing intuitive knowledge. In order for decision systems to be useful for the purposes of training novice practitioners and law students in the complex area of sentencing they must be constructed with an authentic cognitive model that faithfully represents the sentencing process and also the decision-making process. In this paper a pre-cognitive model of the sentencing process is presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Franko Aas, K.: Sentencing in the Age of Information: From Faust to Macintosh. Glasshouse Press, London (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Harcourt, B.E.: Against Prediction: Profiling, Policing, and Punishing in an Actuarial Age. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Vincent, A., Zeleznikow, J.: The Desocialization of the Courts, Sentencing Decision Support and Plea Bargaining. International Review of Law, Computers and Technology 21, 157–175 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Roll, I., Aleven, V., Mclaren, B.M., Koedinger, K.R.: Improving Students’ Helpseeking Skills Using Metacognitive Feedback in an Intelligent Tutoring System. Learning and Instruction 21, 267–280 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Arnold, V., Clark, N., Collier, P.A., Leech, S.A., Sutton, S.G.: The Differential Use and Effect of Knowledge-Based System Explanations in Novice and Expert Judgment Decisions. MIS Quarterly 30, 79–97 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Arnold, V., Clark, N., Collier, P.A., Leech, S.A., Sutton, S.G.: Explanation Provision and Use in an Intelligent Decision Aid. Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management 12, 5–27 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Arnold, V., Collier, P.A., Leech, S.A., Sutton, S.G., Vincent, A.: Incase: Simulating Experience to Accelerate Expertise Development by Knowledge Workers. Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management (forthcoming)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ericsson, K.A.: Deliberate Practice and the Acquisition and Maintenance of Expert Performance in Medicine and Related Domains. Academic Medicine 79, S70–S81 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Victorian County Court: County Court of Victoria Annual Report 2008-2009. Victorian County Court, Melbourne (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fox, R.: Victorian Criminal Procedure: State and Federal Law. Monash Law Book Co-operative, Clayton (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Tak, P.J.: Sentencing and Punishment in the Netherlands. In: Tonry, M.H., Frase, R.S. (eds.) Sentencing and Sanctions in Western Countries, pp. 151–187. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Weigend, T.: Sentencing and Punishment in Germany. In: Tonry, M.H., Frase, R.S. (eds.) Sentencing and Sanctions in Western Countries, pp. 188–221. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Roberts, J.V.: Mandatory Sentences of Imprisonment in Common Law Jurisdictions: Some Representative Models. Research and Statistics Division, Department of Justice Canada (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hoel, A., Gelb, K.: Sentencing Matters: Mandatory Sentencing. Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council, Melbourne (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Machin, D.: Sentencing Guidelines Around the World. The Sentencing Commission for Scotland (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Guerra Thompson, S.: Sentencing Guidelines in the US: A Primer. Reform. 86, 45–48 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Sentencing Act, Victoria (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Frankel, M.E.: Criminal Sentences: Law without Order. Hill and Wang, New York (1973)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Bagaric, M., Edney, R.: What’s Instinct Got To Do With It? A Blueprint for a Coherent Approach to Punishing Criminals. Criminal Law Journal 27, 119–141 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ashworth, A.: Sentencing and Criminal Justice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2005)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Markarian v The Queen. High Court of Australia 25 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Williscroft, R.V.: Victoria Reports 292 (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Traynor, S., Potas, I.: Sentencing Methodology: Two Tiered or Instinctive Synthesis. Sentencing Trends and Issues 25, 1–22 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Dane, E., Pratt, M.G.: Exploring Intuition and its Role in Managerial Decision Making. Academy of Management Review 32, 33–54 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tata, C.: Sentencing as Craftwork and the Binary Epistemologies of the Discretionary Decision Process. Social and Legal Studies 16, 425–447 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Dreyfus, H.L., Dreyfus, S.E.: Mind Over Machine: The Power of Intuition and Expertise in the Era of the Computer. The Free Press, New York (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Klein, G.: The Power of Intuition: How to Use your Gut Feelings to Make Better Decisions at Work. Doubleday, New York (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hall, M.J.J., Calabro, D., Sourdin, T., Stranieri, A., Zeleznikow, J.: Supporting Discretionary Decision-Making with Information Technology: A Case Study in the Criminal Sentencing Jurisdiction. University of Ottawa Law and Technology Journal 2, 1–36 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Zeleznikow, J., Hunter, D.: Building Intelligent Legal Information Systems: Representation and Reasoning in Law. Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers, Deventer (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Leech, S.A., Collier, P.A., Clark, N.: Modeling Expertise: A Case Study Using Multiple Corporate Recovery Experts. Advances in Accounting Information Systems 6, 85–106 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Leech, S.A., Collier, P.A., Clark, N.: A Generalized Model of Decision-Making Processes for Companies in Financial Distress. Accounting Forum 23, 155–174 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Susskind, R.E.: Expert Systems in Law. Clarendon, Oxford (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Jonassen, D.H., Beissner, K., Yacci, M.: Sturcutral Knowledge: Techniques for Representing, Conveying, and Acquiring Structural Knowledge. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Thomas, D.A.: Principles of Sentencing: The Sentencing Policy of the Court of Appeal Criminal Division. Heinemann, London (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ericsson, K.A., Simon, H.A.: Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. MIT Press, Cambridge (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Jonassen, D.H.: Learning to Solve Problems: A Handbook for Designing Problem-Solving Learning Environments. Routledge, New York (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Mackenzie, G.: How Judges Sentence. The Federation Press, Annandale (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Fox, R., Freiberg, A.: Sentencing: State and Federal Law in Victoria. Oxford University Press, Melbourne (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Giakis, R.v.: Victorian Reports 973 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Judicial College of Victoria: Victorian Sentencing Manual, http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/emanuals/VSM/default.htm

  41. Niu, L., Lu, J., Zhang, G.: Cognition-Driven Decision Support for Business Intelligence: Models, Techniques, Systems and Applications. Springer, Berlin (2009)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  42. Stranieri, A., Zeleznikow, J.: The Role of Open Texture and Stare Decisis in Data Mining Discretion. In: Jurix 1998, pp. 101–112 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Stranieri, A., Yearwood, J., Meikle, T.: The Dependency of Discretion and Consistency on Knowledge Representation. International Review of Law, Computers and Technology 14, 325–340 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Bagaric, M.: Punishment and Sentencing: A Rational Approach. Cavendish, London (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Australian Law Reform Commission: Same Crime, Same Time: Sentencing of Federal Offenders. Australian Law Reform Commission, Canberra (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Fox, R., Freiberg, A.: Sentencing: State and Federal Law in Victoria. Oxford University Press, Melbourne (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Storey, R.v.: Victorian Reports 359 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Shapland, J.: Between Conviction and Sentence: The Process of Mitigation. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Legal Studies Deprtment, L.T.U.: Guilty, your Worship: A study of Victoria’s Magistrates’ Courts. Legal Studies Department, La Trobe University, Bundoora (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Lovegrove, A.: Judicial Decision Making, Sentencing Policy, and Numerical Guidance. Springer, New York (1989)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  51. Apistola, M., Mommers, L., Lodder, A.R.: A Knowledge Management Exercise in the Domain of Sentencing: Towards an XML Specification. In: Winkels, R., van Engers, T., Bench-Capon, T. (eds.) Proceedings of Second International Workshop on Legal Ontologies, pp. 48–57. The University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  52. van Eemeren, F.H.: The State of the Art in Argumentation Theory. In: van Eemeren, F.H. (ed.) Crucial Concepts in Argumentation Theory, pp. 11–26. University of Amsterdam Press, Amsterdam (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  53. van Eemeren, F.H., Kruiger, T.: Identifying Argumentation Schemes. In: van Eemeren, F.H., Grootendorst, R., Blair, J.A., Willard, C.A. (eds.) Argumentation: Perspectives and Approaches (Proceedings of the Conference on Argumentation 1986), pp. 70–81. Foris Publications, Dordrecht (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Stranieri, A., Zeleznikow, J.: A Survey of Argumentation Structures for Intelligent Decision Support. In: Burnstein, F. (ed.) Proceedings of 1999 International Society for Decision Support Systems, pp. 1–23. Monash University, Melbourne (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Toulmin, S.E.: The Uses of Argument: Updated Edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  56. Yearwood, J., Stranieri, A.: The Generic/Actual Argument model of practical reasoning. Decision Support Systems 41, 358–379 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Mackenzie, G., Stobbs, N., O’Leary, J.: Principles of Sentencing. Federation Press, Annandale (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Ashworth, A., Genders, E., Mansfield, G., Peay, J., Player, E.: Sentencing in the Crown Court: Report of an Exploratory Study. Centre for Criminological Research, Oxford (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  59. Brest, P.: The critique of pure reason: The role of intuition in judgement and decision making. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (2005) (keynote paper)

    Google Scholar 

  60. Sauter, V.L.: Intuitive decision-making. Communications of the ACM 42, 109–115 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Hogarth, R.M.: Educating Intuition. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (2001)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management and Information Systems, Victoria University, P.O. Box 14490, Melbourne, 8001, Australia

    Andrew Vincent

Authors
  1. Andrew Vincent
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Bologna, Italy

    Monica Palmirani

  2. Torino Law School, University of Torino, via s. Ottavio 20, 10124, Torino, Italy

    Ugo Pagallo

  3. Institute of Law and Technology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193, Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain

    Pompeu Casanovas

  4. European University Institute and CIRSFID, via Zamboni 33, 40126, Bologna, Italy

    Giovanni Sartor

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Vincent, A. (2012). Argumentation and Intuitive Decision Making: Criminal Sentencing and Sentence Indication. In: Palmirani, M., Pagallo, U., Casanovas, P., Sartor, G. (eds) AI Approaches to the Complexity of Legal Systems. Models and Ethical Challenges for Legal Systems, Legal Language and Legal Ontologies, Argumentation and Software Agents. AICOL 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7639. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35731-2_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35731-2_15

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-35730-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-35731-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation