Hell why not add juries themselves to the list? A widely cited 2011 study[^0] found that the probability of a jury granting parole was around 65% at the start of a session but dropped to nearly 0% right before lunch. After having lunch the probability again jumps to ~65%

What kind of justice system do we have where whether or not people have had lunch is the biggest factor in outcomes?

[^0]: https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1018033108

And yet I bet that study would fail to reproduce so it to is pseudoscience!

Haha that would be fitting, but it's an observational study not an experiment

1. The study you link is the famous one about judges. It doesn't mention juries, nor are juries involved in the study.

2. Whether or not people have had lunch is not the biggest factor in outcomes. The most important thing you can read about this study is Daniel Lakens' commentary:

> I appreciate that people have tried to think about which mechanism could cause this effect, and if you are interested, highly recommend reading the commentaries (and perhaps even the response by the authors).

> But I want to take a different approach in this blog. I think we should dismiss this finding, simply because it is impossible. When we interpret how impossibly large the effect size is, anyone with even a modest understanding of psychology should be able to conclude that it is impossible that this data pattern is caused by a psychological mechanism. As psychologists, we shouldn’t teach or cite this finding, nor use it in policy decisions as an example of psychological bias in decision making.

> If hunger had an effect on our mental resources of this magnitude, our society would fall into minor chaos every day at 11:45. Or at the very least, our society would have organized itself around this incredibly strong effect of mental depletion. Just like manufacturers take size differences between men and women into account when producing items such as golf clubs or watches, we would stop teaching in the time before lunch, doctors would not schedule surgery, and driving before lunch would be illegal. If a psychological effect is this big, we don’t need to discover it and publish it in a scientific journal - you would already know it exists.

> I think it is telling that most psychologists don’t seem to be able to recognize data patterns that are too large to be caused by psychological mechanisms. There are simply no plausible psychological effects that are strong enough to cause the data pattern in the hungry judges study. Implausibility is not a reason to completely dismiss empirical findings, but impossibility is.

( https://daniellakens.blogspot.com/2017/07/impossibly-hungry-... )

If you do read the other commentary, it is clear that the reason the rate drops to zero before breaks is that cases are scheduled with an eye toward not running into the break. The 0% grant rate causes the just-before-the-break timing, not the other way around.

So, they were measuring that there was zero grants during lunch breaks?

The courts don't start a long, difficult case at 11:30, they schedule the difficult case after lunch and fill the time before lunch with simple, slam-dunk cases.