Los problemas probatorios de la injusticia testimonial en el derecho
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5347/isonomia.59/2023.653Parole chiave:
parzialità giudiziale soggettiva, ingiustizia testimoniale, pregiudizi impliciti, misure implicite, credibilità del testimoneAbstract
I problemi probatori dell'ingiustizia testimoniale nel diritto
Una delle forme più comuni e meno studiate di pregiudizio giudiziario soggettivo è la diminuzione della credibilità accordata a un testimone a causa di un pregiudizio identitario implicito da parte dell'operatore giudiziario. In epistemologia sociale, questo fenomeno è stato studiato sotto il nome di ingiustizia testimoniale. In questo saggio mostriamo che per determinare il verificarsi di un caso di ingiustizia testimoniale nel diritto, devono essere soddisfatte tre condizioni impossibili da verificare empiricamente e che si basano su assunti psicologici che sono stati messi in discussione negli ultimi anni. Senza la possibilità di verificare queste condizioni, ci troviamo di fronte a un tipo di pregiudizio giudiziario non rilevabile. Proponiamo invece una nuova comprensione dell'ingiustizia testimoniale nel diritto come fenomeno più generale che descrive una tendenza comportamentale pregiudizievole ricorrente da parte di un operatore giudiziario. Così intesa, l'ingiustizia testimoniale è pienamente verificabile.
Riferimenti bibliografici
Abramson, Kate, 2014: “Turning Up the Lights on Gaslighting”. Philosophical Perspectives, vol. 28, pp. 1–30.
Alcoff, Linda M., 2010: “Epistemic Identities”. Episteme, vol. 7, núm. 2, pp. 128–37.
Álvarez, Giovanni, 2018: Protocolo de Comunicación de la Unidad de Investigación y Acusación con Víctimas de Violencia Sexual. Bogotá, JEP Unidad de Investigación y Acusación (UIA).
Amaya, Amalia, 2018: “The Virtue of Judicial Humility”. Jurisprudence, vol. 9, núm. 1, pp. 97–107.
Anderson, Elizabeth, 2012: “Epistemic Justice as a Virtue of Social Institutions”. Social Epistemology, vol. 26, núm. 2, pp. 163–173.
Arena, Federico J., 2021: “Acerca de la Relevancia de las Investigaciones sobre Sesgos Implícitos para el Control de la Decisión Judicial”, en Arena, Federico J.; Luque, Pau y Moreno Cruz, Diego (eds.), Razonamiento Jurídico y Ciencias Cognitivas. Bogotá, Universidad Externado de Colombia, pp. 157–186.
________, 2017: “The Pragmatics of Stereotypes in Legal Decision-Making”, en Poggi, Francesca y Capone, Alessandro (eds.), Pragmatics and Law: Practical and Theoretical Perspectives. Cham, Springer, pp. 379–399.
Arcila-Valenzuela, Migdalia y Páez, Andrés, 2022: “Testimonial Injustice: The Facts of the Matter”. Review of Philosophy and Psychology. DOI: 10.1007/s13164-022-00662-w
Arkes, Hal R. y Tetlock, Philip E., 2004: “Attributions of Implicit Prejudice, or ‘Would Jesse Jackson «Fail» the Implicit Association Test?’”. Psychological Inquiry, vol. 15, núm. 4, pp. 257–278.
Bertrand, Marianne y Mullainathan, Sendhil, 2003: “Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination”. American Economic Review, vol. 94, núm. 4, pp. 991–1013.
Bickman, Leonard, 1974: “The Social Power of a Uniform”. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, vol. 4, núm. 1, pp. 47–61.
Brownstein, Michael, 2018: The Implicit Mind: Cognitive Architecture, the Self, and Ethics. New York, Oxford University Press.
Brownstein, Michael; Madva, Alex y Gawronski, Bertrand, 2019: “What Do Implicit Measures Measure?” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Cognitive Science, vol. 10, núm. 5, p. e1501.
Buller, David B. y Burgoon, Judee K., 1996: “Interpersonal Deception Theory”. Communication Theory, vol. 6, núm. 3, pp. 203–242.
Carter, Evelyn R.; Onyeador, Ivuoma N. y Lewis Jr., Neil A., 2020: “Developing & Delivering Effective Anti-Bias Training: Challenges & Recommendations”. Behavioral Science & Policy, vol. 6, núm. 1, pp. 57–70.
Chaiken, Shelly, 1979: “Communicator Physical Attractiveness and Persuasion”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 37, núm. 8, pp. 1387–1397.
Clérico, Laura, 2018: “Hacia un Análisis Integral de Estereotipos: Desafiando la Garantía Estándar de Imparcialidad”. Revista Derecho del Estado, vol. 41, pp. 67–96.
Combs, Nancy A., 2010: Fact-finding Without Facts: The Uncertain Evidentiary Foundations of International Criminal Convictions. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Cooley, Erin y Payne, B. Keith, 2017: “Using Groups to Measure Intergroup Prejudice”. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, vol. 43, pp. 46–59.
Cooper, Joel; Bennett, Elizabeth A. y Sukel, Holly, 1996: “Complex Scientific Testimony: How Do Juries Make Decisions?” Law and Human Behavior, vol. 20, núm. 4, pp. 379–394.
Darley, John M. y Batson, C. Daniel, 1973: “‘From Jerusalem to Jericho’: A Study of Situational and Dispositional Variables in Helping Behavior”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 27, núm. 1, pp. 100–108.
DePaulo, Bella M.; Lindsay, James J.; Malone, Brian E.; Muhlenburuck, Laura; Charlton, Kelly y Cooper, Harris, 2003: “Cues to Deception”. Psychological Bulletin, vol. 129, núm. 1, pp. 74–118.
Doris, John M., 2002: Lack of Character: Personality and Moral Behavior. New York, Cambridge University Press.
Dunham, Yarrow; Baron, Andrew S. y Banaji, Mahzarin R., 2008: “The Development of Implicit Intergroup Cognition”. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, vol. 12, núm. 7, pp. 248–253.
Ekman, Paul y O’Sullivan, Maureen, 1991: “Who Can Catch a Liar?”. American Psychologist, vol. 46, núm. 9, p. 913–920.
Fazio, Russell H.; Jackson, Joni R.; Dunton, Bridget C. y Williams, Carol J., 1995: “Variability in Automatic Activation as an Unobtrusive Measure of Racial Attitudes: A Bona Fide Pipeline?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 69, pp. 1013–1027.
Forscher, Patrick; Lai, Calvin K.; Axt, Jordan R.; Ebersole, Charles R.; Herman, Michelle; Devine, Patricia G. y Nosek, Brian A., 2019: “A Meta-Analysis of Procedures to Change Implicit Measures”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 117, núm. 3, pp. 522–559.
Freeman, Lauren, & Stewart, Heather, 2021: “Toward a Harm-Based Account of Microaggressions”. Perspectives on Psychological Science, vol. 16, núm. 5, pp. 1008–1023.
Fricker, Miranda, 2023: “Institutionalized Testimonial Injustices: The Construction of a Confession Myth”. Journal of Dialectics of Nature, vol. 45, núm. 7, pp. 1–12.
________, 2021: “Institutional Epistemic Vices”, en Kidd, Ian James; Battaly, Heather y Cassam, Quassim (eds.), Vice Epistemology. New York, Routledge, pp. 89–107.
________, 2017: “Evolving Concepts of Epistemic Injustice”, en Kidd, Ian James; Medina, José y Polhaus Jr., Gail (eds.), Routledge Handbook of Epistemic Injustice. New York, Routledge, pp. 53–60.
________, 2010a: “Can There Be Institutional Virtues?”, en Gendler, Tamar y Hawthorne, John (eds.), Oxford Studies in Epistemology. Volume 3. Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 235–252.
________, 2010b: “Replies to Alcoff, Goldberg, and Hookway on Epistemic Injustice”. Episteme, vol. 7, núm. 2, pp. 164–78.
________, 2007: Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Fyfe, Shannon, 2018: “Testimonial Injustice in International Criminal Law”. Symposion, vol. 5, núm. 2, pp. 155–171.
Gamero, Isabel, 2018: “Injusticia Epistémica en un Juicio sobre Violencia de Género”. Memorias de las V Jornadas CINIG de Estudios de Género y Feminismo y III Congreso Internacional de Identidades. Ensenada: Universidad Nacional de La Plata.
Gawronski, Bertram; Brannon, Skylar y Bodenhausen, Galen V., 2017: “The Associative-Propositional Duality in the Representation, Formation, and Expression of Attitudes”, en Deutsch, Roland; Gawronski, Bertram y Hofmann, Wilhelm (eds.), Reflective and Impulsive Determinants of Human Behavior. New York, Psychology Press, pp. 115–130.
Gawronski, Bertram; Morrison, Mike; Phills, Curtis E. y Galdi, Silvia, 2017: “Temporal Stability of Implicit and Explicit Measures: A Longitudinal Analysis”. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, vol. 43, pp. 300–312.
Greenwald, Anthony G.; Banaji, Mahzarin R. y Nosek, Brian A., 2015: “Statistically Small Effects of the Implicit Association Test Can Have Societally Large Effects”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 108, pp. 553–561.
Greenwald, Anthony G.; McGhee, Debbie D. y Schwartz, Jordan, 1998: “Measuring Individual Differences in Implicit Cognition: The Implicit Association Test”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 74, pp. 1464–1480.
Greenwald, Anthony G.; Poehlman, T. Andrew; Uhlmann, Eric Luis y Banaji, Mahzarin R., 2009: “Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-Analysis of Predictive Validity”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 97, pp. 17–41.
Hartshorne, Hugh y May, M. A., 1928: Studies in the Nature of Character. Vol. 1: Studies in Deceit. New York, Macmillan.
Hartwig, Maria, & Bond Jr., Charles F., 2011: “Why Do Lie-Catchers Fail? A Lens Model Meta-Analysis of Human Lie Judgments”. Psychological Bulletin, vol. 137, núm. 4, pp. 643–659.
Ho, Hock Lai, 2013: “Virtuous Deliberation on the Criminal Verdict”, en Amaya, Amalia y Ho, Hock Lai (eds.), Law, Virtue, and Justice. Oxford, Hart, pp. 241–263.
Honeycutt, Nathan; Jussim, Lee; Careem, Akeela y Lewis Jr., Neil, 2020: “Are STEM Faculty Biased Against Female Applicants? A Robust Replication and Extension of Moss-Racusin and Colleagues (2012)”. PsyArXiv. https://psyarxiv.com/ezp6d/.
Kinoshita, Sachiko y Peek-O’Leary, Marie, 2005: “Does the Compatibility Effect in the Race Implicit Association Test Reflect Familiarity or Affect?” Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, vol. 12, núm. 3, pp. 442–452.
Lai, Calvin K.; Hoffman, Kelly M. y Nosek, Brian A., 2013: “Reducing Implicit Prejudice”. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, vol. 7, núm. 5, pp. 315–330.
Lackey, Jennifer, 2018: “Credibility and the Distribution of Epistemic Goods”, en McCain, Kevin (ed.), Believing in Accordance with the Evidence. New Essays on Evidentialism. Cham: Springer, pp. 145–168.
________, 2006: “It Takes Two to Tango”, en Lackey, Jennifer y Sosa, Ernest (eds.), The Epistemology of Testimony. Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 160–189.
Lindsey, Jaime, 2019: “Testimonial Injustice and Vulnerability: A Qualitative Analysis of Participation in the Court of Protection”. Social & Legal Studies, vol. 28, núm. 4, pp. 450–469.
Machery, Edouard, 2022: “Anomalies in Implicit Attitudes Research”. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, vol. 13, núm. 1, p. e1569.
________, 2017: “Do Indirect Measures of Biases Measure Traits or Situations?” Psychological Inquiry, vol. 28, núm. 4, pp. 288–291.
Matida, Janaina, 2020: “É Preciso Superar as Injustiças Epistêmicas na Prova Testemunhal”. Limite Penal, mayo 22, 2020. https://www.conjur.com.br/2020-mai-22/limite-penal-preciso-superar-injusticas-epistemicas-prova-testemunhal
Mercier, Hugo, 2020: Not Born Yesterday. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Mischel, Walter y Peake, Philip K., 1982: “Beyond Déjà Vu in the Search for Cross-Situational Consistency”. Psychological Review, vol. 89, núm. 6, p. 730–755.
Mitchell, Gregory y Tetlock, Philip, 2006: “Antidiscrimination Law and the Perils of Mindreading”. Ohio State Law, vol. 6, pp. 1023–1121.
Moss-Racusin, Corinne A.; Dovidio, John F.; Brescoll, Victoria L.; Graham, Mark J. y Handelsman, Jo, 2012: “Science Faculty’s Subtle Gender Biases Favor Male Students”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 109, núm. 41, pp. 16474–16479.
Nosek, Brian A.; Hawkins, Carlee Beth y Frazier, Rebecca S., 2012: “Implicit Social Cognition”, en Fiske, Susan T. y Macrae, C. Neil (eds.), Handbook of Social Cognition. New York, Sage, pp. 31–53.
Nisbett, Richard E. y Wilson, Timothy D., 1977: “Telling More than We Can Know: Verbal Reports on Mental Processes”. Psychological Review, vol. 84, núm. 3, pp. 231–259.
Norton, Michael I.; Vandello, Joseph A. y Darley, John M., 2004: “Casuistry and Social Category Bias”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 87, núm. 6, pp. 817–831.
Oswald, Frederick L.; Mitchell, Gregory; Blanton, Hart; Jaccard, James y Tetlock, Philip E., 2013: “Predicting Ethnic and Racial Discrimination: A Meta-Analysis of IAT Criterion Studies”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 105, pp. 171–192.
Páez, Andrés, 2021a: “Los sesgos cognitivos y la legitimidad racional de las decisiones judiciales”, en Arena, Federico J.; Luque, Pau y Moreno Cruz, Diego (eds.), Razonamiento Jurídico y Ciencias Cognitivas. Bogotá, Universidad Externado de Colombia, pp. 187–222.
________, 2021b: “An Epistemological Analysis of the Use of Reputation as Evidence”. The International Journal of Evidence and Proof, vol. 25, núm. 3, pp. 200–216.
Páez, Andrés y Matida, Janaina, 2023: “Epistemic Injustice in Criminal Procedure”. Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal, vol. 9, núm. 1, pp. 11–38.
Payne, B. Keith; Cheng, Clara Michelle; Govorun, Olesya y Stewart, Brandon D., 2005: “An Inkblot for Attitudes: Affect Misattribution as Implicit Measurement”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 89, pp. 277–293.
Payne, B. Keith y Gawronski, Bertram, 2010: “A History of Implicit Social Cognition. Where Is It Coming From? Where Is It Now? Where Is It Going?”, en Gawronski, Bertram y Payne, B. Keith (eds.), Handbook of Implicit Social Cognition. Measurement, Theory, and Applications. New York, The Guilford Press, pp. 1–15.
Payne, B. Keith; Vuletich, Heidi A. y Lundberg, Kristjen, 2017: “The Bias of Crowds: How Implicit Bias Bridges Personal and Systemic Prejudice”. Psychological Inquiry, vol. 28, pp. 233–248.
Pronin, Emily; Lin, Daniel Y. y Ross, Lee, 2002: “The Bias Blind Spot: Perceptions of Bias in Self Versus Others”. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, vol. 28, núm. 3, pp. 369–381.
Quillian, Lincoln; Pager, Devah; Hexel, Ole y Midtbøen, Arnfinn, 2017: “Meta-Analysis of Field Experiments Shows No Change in Racial Discrimination in Hiring Over Time”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 114, núm. 41, pp. 10870–10875.
Ross, Lee y Nisbett, Richard E., 1991: The Person and the Situation. Philadelphia, Temple University Press.
Saul, Jennifer, 2019: “(How) Should We Tell Implicit Bias Stories?” Disputatio, vol. 10, núm. 50, pp. 217–244.
Schieber, Joseph, 2012: “Against Credibility”. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, vol. 90, pp. 1–18.
Sitton, Sarah C. y Griffin, Susan T., 1981: “Detection of Deception from Clients’ Eye Contact Patterns”. Journal of Counseling Psychology, vol. 28, núm. 3, pp. 269–271.
Schimmack, Ulrich, 2021: “The Implicit Association Test: A Method in Search of a Construct”. Perspectives on Psychological Science, vol. 16, núm. 2, pp. 396–414.
Scopelliti, Irene; Morewedge, Carey K.; McCormick, Erin; Min, H. Lauren; Lebrecht, Sophie y Kassam, Karim, 2015: “Bias Blind Spot: Structure, Measurement, and Consequences”. Management Science, vol. 61, núm. 10, pp. 2468–2486.
Sherman, Benjamin R., 2015: “There’s No (Testimonial) Justice: Why Pursuit of a Virtue Is Not the Solution to Epistemic Injustice”. Social Epistemology, vol. 30, núm. 3, pp. 229–250.
Townsend, Dina Lupin y Townsend, Leo, 2021: “Epistemic Injustice and Indigenous Peoples in the Inter-American Human Rights System”. Social Epistemology, vol. 35, núm. 2, pp. 147–159.
Tuerkheimer, Deborah, 2017: “Incredible Women: Sexual Violence and the Credibility Discount”. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, vol. 166, núm. 1, pp. 1–58.
Webb, Thomas L.; Sheeran Paschal y Pepper, John, 2010: “Gaining Control Over Responses to Implicit Attitude Tests: Implementation Intentions Engender Fast Responses on Attitude-Incongruent Trials”. British Journal of Social Psychology, vol. 51, núm. 1, pp. 13–32.
Wistrich, Andrew J. y Rachlinski, Jeffrey J., 2018: “Implicit Bias in Judicial Decision Making. How It Affects Judgment and What Judges Can Do about It”, en Redfield, Sarah E. (ed.), Enhancing Justice: Reducing Bias. New York: American Bar Association, pp. 87–130.
##submission.downloads##
Pubblicato
Come citare
Fascicolo
Sezione
Licenza
Copyright (c) 2023 Isonomía - Revista de teoría y filosofía del derecho
Questo lavoro è fornito con la licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 4.0 Internazionale.
ITAM, responsable de la publicación de la Revista, tiene los derechos de autor sobre los artículos publicados y el resto de las contribuciones. Las publicaciones están en acceso abierto y bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Esto significa, entre otras cosas, que los autores pueden compartir libremente sus artículos, una vez publicados en Isonomía, en sus páginas web personales, Academia.edu, etc. Entre la aceptación formal y la publicación en línea, los autores pueden compartir los borradores finales de sus artículos. En cambio, los autores deben pedir permiso para reproducir o reimprimir el trabajo, y mencionar, en la primera nota a pie de página, "publicado previamente en Isonomía, año, n. x, pp. xx-xx".
