JANE MITCHELL
Prosecutors wield enormous influence—and yet the factors guiding their choices remain largely unknown. Scholars have long considered the inner workings of prosecutorial discretion a “black box.”
This study seeks to remedy that gap by applying a discovery-based qualitative methodology to study prosecutorial discretion. Relying on fourteen in-depth interviews with prosecutors,* this study identifies an influence on prosecutorial discretion
previously unaccounted for in the literature: stress. Prosecutors’ stress responses directly impact their decision-making and performance, for better or for worse.
Prosecutors’ stress responses align with the principles of cognitive appraisal theory. According to this psychological theory, people “appraise” stressful situations as either “challenges” or “threats.” Each mental state triggers a distinctive set of
cognitive, emotional, and physical responses. Challenge states improve performance and thinking. Threat states impair performance and decision-making.
The interview data demonstrates that prosecutors face a relentless stream of stressors at work. The way prosecutors respond to those stressors carries profound implications for criminal justice. Prosecutors operating in challenge states benefit
from sharper decision-making and improved performance. Prosecutors in threat states, on the other hand, are more prone to negative bias, mistakes, abrasive behavior, and burnout. This has particular relevance for trial work, which prosecutors report being the most stressful part of their job: threat states predispose prosecutors to plead cases instead of going to trial.
While stress responses occur at an individual level, much can be done at an organizational level to promote challenge instead of threat. The Article concludes with structural recommendations for facilitating challenge states.