This study examines the relationship between interpersonal contact and judicial decision-making, particularly in appellate courts. Surprising Finding: Despite increased contact, bias remains unchanged or even reinforced.
The research challenges conventional wisdom by revealing that greater interaction does not automatically lead to fairer outcomes. Using original data collected through a survey of judges across several countries 🗺️, combined with regression analysis 🔍, the authors demonstrate counterintuitive results: more contact correlates with increased polarization rather than reduced discrimination.
Implications: This finding suggests policy efforts aimed solely at increasing cross-group interaction may be ineffective for reducing judicial bias. The article offers new insights into how social interactions shape legal judgments and proposes targeted interventions to mitigate unintended consequences.
