Behavioral Economics and Framing Effects in Guilty Pleas: A Defendant Decision Making Experiment

Because over ninety percent of convictions are the result of guilty pleas, it is important to understand what induces defendants to plead guilty. This study specifically focuses on how the framing of a plea bargain affects a defendant’s decision to plead guilty. The participants in this experiment underwent two hypothetical scenarios: one in which they were “innocent” and another in which they were “guilty.” They were then randomly offered plea deals with a gain, loss, or neutral frame. The results indicated that for innocent defendants, framing the plea as a gain significantly increased the likelihood that a plea would be accepted, whereas a loss or neutral frame had generally the same rates of acceptance. For guilty defendants, gain framing had the opposite effect: nearly twice as many participants rejected the plea compared to those presented with a loss or neutral frame. Despite the fact that the manner in which a plea deal is framed to a defendant has a significant effect on a defendant’s decision to accept or reject a plea, there is currently no regulation regarding the presentation of pleas. Thus, until there are uniform standards on how a plea must be presented, defendants will continue to be influenced by the way in which the prosecutor, defense attorney, and judge subjectively decide to frame them.

“The observed framing effects were profound and support speculation by several scholars that the manner in which a plea is framed induces differential plea acceptance rates.” p. 242