Judges looking into themselves: what makes a good judge?

Sentencing research lacks empirical studies based on judges' experiences and viewpoints. This article contributes to that field by discussing criminal judges' professional self-perception regarding their role and the sentencing decision-making process. We developed a mixed-methods study incorporating a self-report questionnaire (n = 49) and a semi-structured interview (n = 12). We tested for exploratory factor analysis and relations between variables from the data of the questionnaire and analysed the interviews through content analysis. The results show that, despite characterising sentencing as a logical/rational process, judges took more introspective and controversial positions in the interviews. Judges minimised the relevance of emotional aspects in sentencing decision-making, even though emotions are an inevitable part of those processes. These findings contribute to understanding sources of excessive judicial discretion and identifying aspects of sentencing decision-making that are more vulnerable to implicit bias. We argue that these aspects must be intentionally considered and incorporated into judges' training, promoting effective emotion regulation strategies that allow for cognitive change and emotional disclosure.