Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Do judges give out tougher sentences when hungry? A study too good to be true

inews.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 210 posts

Re: Do judges give out tougher sentences when hungry? A study too good to be true

#61

Post by hgsgm »

public_defender wrote: post #19

I always wondered about the original study whether they controlled for the fact that courts control their case calendars. I can't count the number of times I've had a client's case shuffled to the back of the line because the judge didn't want to deal with it (or wanted to make me or the client wait longer). Also, Muslim countries commonly offer amnesty or executive clemency at the Eid to people who have been convict…

> if I am a judge adjudicating a case for theft and I know that the defendant will be pardoned on the Eid, I might acquit or pronounce a light sentence.

Why? Wouldn't that undermine the meaning of Eid?

Re: Do judges give out tougher sentences when hungry? A study too good to be true

#62

Post by hgsgm »

Jolter wrote: post #42
azan_ wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comparing the effect of different fasting duration only across judges who fasted during Ramadan most likely removed the influence of religion-inspired forgiving behavior.

How would it? They are all practicing muslims. How could you correct for a trait that is present in every one of the study participants?

That's the scientist's ideal scenario that avoids the need the correct for a trait.

Re: Do judges give out tougher sentences when hungry? A study too good to be true

#63

Post by glogla »

fhackenberger wrote: post #53
chaosbolt wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

12 days with no food? Like just water and electrolytes etc.? This is some spartan discipline.

Definitely doable and very common in many old cultures, have a look at the film "The science of fasting" (original German), might be eye opening: https://youtu.be/WgLJ_dfKy1E

> Video unavailable. This video contains content from LDS, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds

I hope LDS burns in hell, whoever they are.

Re: Do judges give out tougher sentences when hungry? A study too good to be true

#64

Post by cactusplant7374 »

glogla wrote: post #63
fhackenberger wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely doable and very common in many old cultures, have a look at the film "The science of fasting" (original German), might be eye opening: https://youtu.be/WgLJ_dfKy1E

> Video unavailable. This video contains content from LDS, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds I hope LDS burns in hell, whoever they are.

Same here. Guess they don’t like Ecuador.

Re: Do judges give out tougher sentences when hungry? A study too good to be true

#65

Post by leroy-is-here »

ShamelessC wrote: post #39
franciscop wrote: post #16

Interesting bias on the bias: the author of this article seems not to have experienced a prolonged fast themselves, otherwise they'd know this is not true at all: > "longer fasts – and thus, presumably, greater hunger" As anyone who has fasted for probably any reason can tell you, the longer the fast the less hungry you are overall AFTER an initial peak. Meaning, miss a meal and you are hungry, miss two and you becom…

All these sibling comments suggest it is 100% you that has the bias. Is it really not conceivable to you that this varies by person?

Modern humans have modern inventions like zero calorie foods. I’ve talked to many who have fasted where their body probably disagreed with that statement.

Re: Do judges give out tougher sentences when hungry? A study too good to be true

#66

Post by foobarbecue »

glogla wrote: post #63
fhackenberger wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely doable and very common in many old cultures, have a look at the film "The science of fasting" (original German), might be eye opening: https://youtu.be/WgLJ_dfKy1E

> Video unavailable. This video contains content from LDS, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds I hope LDS burns in hell, whoever they are.

Latter Day Saints??? The Mormons? (I get the copyright block message here in the USA)

Re: Do judges give out tougher sentences when hungry? A study too good to be true

#67

Post by cm2187 »

jraby3 wrote: post #17
franciscop wrote: post #16

Interesting bias on the bias: the author of this article seems not to have experienced a prolonged fast themselves, otherwise they'd know this is not true at all: > "longer fasts – and thus, presumably, greater hunger" As anyone who has fasted for probably any reason can tell you, the longer the fast the less hungry you are overall AFTER an initial peak. Meaning, miss a meal and you are hungry, miss two and you becom…

I’ve gone on multiple 3-5 day fasts and disagree (or at least haven’t gotten to this point). My hunger seems to stabilize at very hungry after about two days.

You mean no food for two days? Agree you grow very hungry. But 1 meal a day, after a week or two it becomes a habit and you don't feel hunger, even though you are losing weight.

However make one exception, and hunger comes back immediately. Hard to get on those diets (hunger only goes away after a week) and stay on those diets (one exception, a loving mum who thinks it's not healthy, christmas, etc, and the diet is dead).

Re: Do judges give out tougher sentences when hungry? A study too good to be true

#68

Post by thelittleone »

arunix wrote: post #31
jraby3 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve gone on multiple 3-5 day fasts and disagree (or at least haven’t gotten to this point). My hunger seems to stabilize at very hungry after about two days.

Same here. My hunger plateaued after two days, but didn't go away, just became a bit more bearable. 12 days was the longest fast I've done.

Same. 12 days. Was training like a machine I felt almost high. Very clear mentally. Lots of extra time. Wasn't particularly hungry.

Re: Do judges give out tougher sentences when hungry? A study too good to be true

#69

Post by Jolter »

hsjqllzlfkf wrote: post #60
Jolter wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would it? They are all practicing muslims. How could you correct for a trait that is present in every one of the study participants?

Have you ever heard the phrase "everything else being equal"?

The claim of the gp is this study could “remove the influence of religion-inspired forgiving behavior.”

In order to isolate religious belief, they would need to include a control group of judges who fasted for a month but without any religious affiliation. I don’t see that they’ve done that.

Re: Do judges give out tougher sentences when hungry? A study too good to be true

#70

Post by pastage »

mschuster91 wrote: post #54
gambiting wrote: post #32

I feel like the entire field of psychology is no more valid than homeopathy. Just people coming up with theories why something happens, patting themselves on the back, then the whole thing gets inevitably disproven few years/decades later. And it doesn't have the hallmarks of actual science, where people go ok, our theory was slightly wrong, let's refine it - no, it turns out the entire approaches and assumptions are…

> How many generations of psychologists have been trained on theories of Freud but now if you suggested any of what he said as true you'd be laughed out of the room? That's called science : to act on data and knowledge you have, and to refine your theories with more / better data and knowledge you gain over time. And that's true over all fields of science - no one got it right or complete on the first try, we are bui…

First of all that NG article and links in it are thought provoking, and second I disagree with the details of your facts on many levels. What is not explicitly said in that article though is that using science for political gain goes both ways. It is too easy to categorize every idea as antivaxxer just because it fits your narrative.

I say this as a theoretical hardliner during covid that had to debate against lots of antivax people. There were many bad arguments used against antivaxxers.

Post reply on HN