ABSTRACT Legal processes very often require judges and jurors to make determinations as to what mental states other individuals were in at a particular point in time, i.e., what they intended, believed, considered etc. However, there are two ways that one can try to determine what mental states another person was or is in. One is to apply the information that one has about human psychology in the way that one applies a theory. The other is to mentally pretend that one is in the same situation as the other individual and see what mental states one would have oneself, before attributing these to the other individual. I show that the two methods can lead to different conclusions in the same circumstances and urge that this is a very serious problem.

中文翻译：

---

判断他人的心理状态：法律决策中的“读心术”

摘要 法律程序经常要求法官和陪审员确定其他人在特定时间点的心理状态，即他们的意图、信念、考虑等。然而，有两种方法可以尝试确定另一个人曾经或现在处于什么心理状态。一种是以应用理论的方式应用一个人拥有的关于人类心理学的信息。另一种是在心理上假装一个人和另一个人处于相同的情况，看看自己会有什么心理状态，然后再将这些归因于另一个人。我表明这两种方法在相同的情况下会导致不同的结论，并敦促这是一个非常严重的问题。