About this Research Topic
The field of Law and Emotion originated in discussions that disputed the bifurcation of emotion and law. In the past decade, these discussions have inspired socio-legal research on the dynamic and social dimensions of court work. The field has grown exponentially in diverse disciplines such as sociology, law, philosophy, anthropology, and criminology.
At the core of legal decision-making lies the fundamental principles of objectivity, impartiality, and independence. The Research Topic 'Constructing Objectivity: Emotions in Legal Decision-making' addresses the dialectical processes of translating these principles into everyday judicial practice across a wide range of legal systems. Building on empirical research, including observations, interviews, shadowing, vignettes and workshops with legal professionals, this collection engages with objectivity in the making. It addresses such questions as: What role does court architecture and material objects play in the emotional dynamic of the legal procedure? How do judges manage victims’ emotional statements, or evaluate their credibility? How do judges make independent decisions in a collective setting? What role does extra-legal (lay/specialist) expertise play in co-constructing legal knowledge of relevance to decision-making? How do judges embrace the idea of objectivity? How is all this influenced by the growing digitalization of courts and hearings? In so doing, it investigates the complexity of objectivity as an ideal, a judicial value, requiring performance, promoting courtroom atmosphere, and as sometimes feigned.
This is a closed Research Topic. Participation is by invite only.
At the core of legal decision-making lies the fundamental principles of objectivity, impartiality, and independence. The Research Topic 'Constructing Objectivity: Emotions in Legal Decision-making' addresses the dialectical processes of translating these principles into everyday judicial practice across a wide range of legal systems. Building on empirical research, including observations, interviews, shadowing, vignettes and workshops with legal professionals, this collection engages with objectivity in the making. It addresses such questions as: What role does court architecture and material objects play in the emotional dynamic of the legal procedure? How do judges manage victims’ emotional statements, or evaluate their credibility? How do judges make independent decisions in a collective setting? What role does extra-legal (lay/specialist) expertise play in co-constructing legal knowledge of relevance to decision-making? How do judges embrace the idea of objectivity? How is all this influenced by the growing digitalization of courts and hearings? In so doing, it investigates the complexity of objectivity as an ideal, a judicial value, requiring performance, promoting courtroom atmosphere, and as sometimes feigned.
This is a closed Research Topic. Participation is by invite only.
Keywords: Courts, empathy, impartiality, judging, Law & Emotion, lay judging, legal decision-making, objectivity
Important Note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.
