Study finds that when there's a time limit, even a rational judge would try the case faster, and there would be a tendency towards unfavorable ruling.
Since lunchtime (and presumably end of work day) are such time limits, we see a drop in favorable rulings as lunchtime approaches, and a restoration in favorable rulings right after lunchtime.
And yet, the study, curiously, says, "the analyses by DLA do not provide conclusive evidence for the hypothesis that extraneous factors influence legal rulings". What is lunchtime and end of work day as not extraneous factors?
Note: the above only explains a part of the original finding. And the study admits that there are definitely more factors at play.
> Study finds that when there's a time limit, even a rational judge would try the case faster, and there would be a tendency towards unfavorable ruling.
This study does not say this.
The simulated rational judges are "ideal" and their decisions are not influenced by the ordering of the cases or how long it has been since a break.
The study is saying that despite this perfect behavior, some simulated methods for choosing when to take a break will cause favorable cases to be more likely to be scheduled at the beginning of a session (in their last simulation, this effect only appears after applying the same statistical processing as the original study).
Since lunchtime (and presumably end of work day) are such time limits, we see a drop in favorable rulings as lunchtime approaches, and a restoration in favorable rulings right after lunchtime.
And yet, the study, curiously, says, "the analyses by DLA do not provide conclusive evidence for the hypothesis that extraneous factors influence legal rulings". What is lunchtime and end of work day as not extraneous factors?
Note: the above only explains a part of the original finding. And the study admits that there are definitely more factors at play.