[{"id":634,"title":"Bayesian Judges","sha":"84f00f5c7a87ced32e5784f89eb7caae","user_id":null,"state":"published","body":"Building on Eric Posner and Adrian Vermeule’s valuable insights about the Bayesian nature of the judicial process (see their paper \"The Votes of Other Judges\"), I propose a simple method for improving judicial decision-making, a method I have previously christened \"Bayesian voting\" in honor of Frank Ramsey and Bruno de Finetti. Under this method of voting, judges would not only state the reasons for their decisions; they would also express their degrees of belief in their decisions by \"scoring\" the strength of the moving party's legal arguments, i.e. by assigning a numerical score reflecting their relative degrees of belief in what the proper outcome of an issue or case should be (depending on whether the judge is engaged in outcome-voting or issue-voting). By way of example, a judge’s degree of belief could be expressed in numerical terms anywhere in the range from 0 to 1 or some other uniform scale, such as 0 to 10. The higher the judge's score, the greater the judge’s degree of belief. A score below 0.5 would mean that the party with the burden of persuasion is not expected to prevail; a score above 0.5, by contrast, would indicate that the party is expected to prevail; while a score of 0.5 means the judge is undecided about which party should prevail.","created_at":"2019-12-28T01:44:25.392Z","updated_at":"2021-11-17T23:31:52.243Z","zenodo_id":3660057,"doi":"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3660057","subject":null,"tags":["bayesian voting","judges","law"],"vote_count":1,"view_count":1,"score":1.1,"deleted":false,"muted":false,"tweeted":true,"attachment_file_name":null,"attachment_content_type":null,"attachment_file_size":null,"attachment_updated_at":null}]