Understanding Guilty Pleas through the Lens of Social Science

Social science sheds light upon the numerous reasons a defendant chooses to plead guilty. Defendants are willing to accept responsibility for a crime and consent to entry of judgment of conviction without trial because of several cognitive, social, and developmental influences. Two normative theories dominate this field. First, under the “shadow of the trial” model, defendants rely upon their risk preferences and plead guilty if the offered sentence is less than or equal to the value they expect from trial. Second, under the “trial penalty” model, defendants are seemingly punished for exercising their right to trial instead of accepting the plea conjured by a working group of judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys. Prospect theory—that an individual views options as gains and losses relative to their current status—guides both models. While the effect of gender is largely unclear, minorities reported receiving higher sentences than non-minorities. Within adult samples, age did not directly affect one’s decision to accept or reject pleas. However, adolescents were more likely to accept plea offers than young adults. Those with mental health and cognitive impairments were significantly less able to make knowing and voluntary pleas. Leniency, coercion, expediency, and acquiescence contributed most often to defendants’ decisions. Social scientists can best propel research by developing more-formal models of prosecutorial strategies.

“Although it is important to acknowledge the limits of individual differences given the near-ceiling rate of plea acceptance, it is the case that certain dispositional characteristics . . . will affect whether the plea decision is knowing and voluntary. It is also important to acknowledge that while the decision to accept or reject a plea offer is ultimately the defendant’s, a number of social influence factors play a role as well.” p. 461