The general purpose of this study is to sustein that the consideration of the existing literature on judgment and decision making, from psychology and cognitive sciences, (i) not only endorses our constitutional model of democratic process, based on a substantial adversarial mechanism, while also (ii) proves to be essential to its improvement. At first, the theoretical contours of what should be understood by a democratic judicial process are presented, focusing on the development of the main (and new) aspects related to the adversarial principle - guarantor of the discursive flow that allows the joint construction (co-participated and polycentric) of the decision. Thereafter, the study steps into psychology and cognitive sciences domain. It is starts with the most acknowledged researches in about the limitations of the human reasoning. Later on, Dan Sperber and Hugo Mercier s recent provocative theory of human understanding is introduced (the interactionist theory of reasoning). Finally, it is concluded that such studies and experiments - intimately connected to individual cognition and the aspects of collective deliberation - allow us to acquire a new perspective over several of pertaining topics related to the (effective) adoption of a democratic procedural model.