Our recent past Boden Lecturer Dan Kahan and his colleagues have developed a provocative body of empirical and theoretical scholarship on “cultural cognition” (see, e.g., his article here in the Marquette Law Review). Kahan’s basic thesis is that judges and other legal decisionmakers tend to perceive facts in ways that are congenial to their social values. This is not a conspiracy theory – Kahan’s claim is not that judges intentionally manipulate the facts in order to reach desired results, but that their values shape their perceptions in subtle, unconscious ways.

Paul Secunda has been exploring the implications of cultural cognition theory for law and employment law. An initial foray is here, and the latest entry in the series is here. The new paper is entitled “Psychological Realism in Labor and Employment Law.”

Paul is concerned that culturally driven fact-finding may undercut the perceived legitimacy of the courts. In the new paper, he suggests a variety of potential reforms for further consideration that might address the cultural cognition and legitimacy concerns. Among the more provocative is a proposal for specialized employment-law courts or judges, analogous to our specialized bankruptcy courts.

The abstract of the new paper appears after the jump.