庭审实质化压力下的制度异化及裁判者认知偏差

The Institutional Alienation and the Judge’s Cognitive Bias under the Pressure of the Substantialization of the Court Trial

随着庭审实质化改革推进,愈来愈呈现出这样一种现象,即一边是庭审实质化相关制度不断构建的热潮,一边是制度的不断被异化。解释这一现象,首先需要明确案件事实对裁判的决定性作用,在这一基础之上,才能发现证据信息增量是庭审实质化改革的根本价值取向,进而观察到随着改革沿着这一导向推进,裁判者案件事实认知面临的不确定性压力将大幅增加,而我们裁判者的认知力并不满足这种压力的要求。于是,一方面是庭审实质化制度改革对裁判者认知力提出的更高要求,另一方面是裁判者的心证能力仍然停留在法定证明水平,这样就会出现由认知力矛盾加剧而反向导致的制度系统性异化,并波及整个刑事诉讼程序,其中以庭前阶段的证据移送制度、庭审阶段的证人出庭制度和重新鉴定制度、以及裁判阶段的当庭宣判制度为典型代表,因此,有必要对这些制度的异化结果、原因、类型及发生规律等问题展开分析。并且,在此基础上,进一步分析这些异化制度下的认知偏差问题,从认知心理学等跨学科视角,借助不确定状况下进行判断的经济学决策理论,归纳出锚定效应、频率冗余、具身抑制、权威暗示、曲解效应等多重分析维度,系统分析异化后的制度是如何通过裁判者认知心理造成案件最终裁判结果偏差的。

With the advancement of the substantive reform of court trial,a phenomenon is increasingly clear,which one side is the trend for the continuous establishment of the relevant system of the court trial,and the other is the constant alienation of the system. To explain this phenomenon,it is necessary to define the decisive role of the case fact to the referee. Based on this,we can find that the increment of evidence information is the fundamental value of the Substantive reform of court trial,and then it is observed that with the reform along this direction,the uncertainty of the judges’ cognition of the facts will increase,but the judges’ cognition does not satisfy the pressure. Therefore,on the one hand,the Substantive reform of the court trial puts forward higher requirements on the judge’s cognitive ability. On the other hand,the judge’s ability of free evaluation of the evidence is still remained in the regulated proof,so the systemic alienation will be reversely caused by the intensification of the cognitive contradiction,and affect the entire criminal procedure,in which the evidence transfer system in the pre-trial stage,the witness appearance system and the re-appraisal system in the trial stage,and the court judgment system in the referee stage are typical examples. It is necessary to analyze the alienation results,causes,types and occurrence laws of these systems. The analysis of the thesis further analyzes the cognitive bias under the alienation of these institutions. From the interdisciplinary perspectives such as cognitive psychology,and with the help of the economic theory of decision-making which is judged under the uncertain condition,it sums up the multiple analysis dimensions such as Anchoring effect,Redundancy effect,Misinterpretation effect,Authoritative suggestion and Embodied effect,systematically analyzes how the system after alienation finally leads to the bias of the judgement through the judge’s cognitive psychology.