skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 171323 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: Integration of Hindsight Bias and Counterfactual Thinking: Decision-Making and Drug Courier Profiles
Journal: Law and Human Behavior  Volume:21  Issue:5  Dated:(October 1997)  Pages:539-560
Author(s): J K Robbennolt; M S Sobus
Date Published: 1997
Page Count: 22
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Mental Health
Bethesda, MD 20852
Grant Number: 5 T32 MH16156-15; 5 T32 MH16156-16
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This article investigates the relationship between counterfactual thinking and hindsight bias in a legal decisionmaking context using drug courier profiles and illegal search and seizure.
Abstract: Counterfactual thinking and hindsight bias have each generated separate, substantial bodies of research and provided insight into some areas of legal decisionmaking. Counterfactual thinking takes place when people make "if only" comparisons of actual outcomes with imagined alternative outcomes that could have occurred but did not. Hindsight bias is the tendency to overestimate the probability one assigns to an event once the outcome of that event is known, combined with a denial that such a judgment has been affected by knowledge of the outcome. The article discusses research findings, which demonstrate each of these cognitive processes and show a pattern of results that supports an integrative relationship between them, in the contexts of social cognition and of legal decisionmaking. The article also presents a causal model of decisionmaking in this context, and discusses specific implications of these findings for civil actions to remedy illegal searches. Notes, tables, figures, references
Main Term(s): Criminology
Index Term(s): Civil remedies; Controlled Substances; Decisionmaking; Drug offender profiles; Drug smuggling; Legal privacy protection; Models; Search and seizure; Search and seizure laws; Warrantless search
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.