This study examined jury trials conducted during the first three years since the introduction of a new jury system in South Korea. Case information from all jury trials held during the time was collected and empirically analyzed with a focus on judge‐jury agreement. The statistical analyses were guided by previous studies (Eisenberg et al. ; Spencer ). Results indicated that judges and juries agreed on the verdict 91.4 percent of the time (70.3 percent for conviction and 21.1 percent for acquittal). When they disagreed, juries had a greater tendency to acquit than did judges (7.4 percent and 1.2 percent, respectively). Neither evidentiary strength nor complexity had any systematic impact on agreement rates. Judges were more likely than juries to convict across all levels of evidentiary strength. The accuracy and error rates of jury verdicts were assessed by estimates of conditional probability.

RT-based Concealed Information Test (CIT) has been suggested to detect lying with high accuracy. However, because previous research have been conducted with a minimum of five probes, limited evidence is available to determine whether or not the RT-based CIT is also useful in precisely detecting lies with less than five probes. In this study, the accuracy of an RT-based Concealed Information Test (CIT) was examined by varying the numbers of probes used for the test. Results suggested that the RT-based CIT produces accurate lie detecting outcomes as the number of probes increases from a single probe to three probes. When five probes were used, however, the accuracy level did not improve from the level achieved with three probes. Interestingly, the accuracy decreased when the stimuli for the RT-based CIT were constructed with numeric elements of an event such as the amount of money. Further discussed are possible explanations in regards to the differences observed in the RT-based CIT accuracy rates dependent on the numbers of probes.Based on the Experiment 1, in the second experiment we measured the accuracy of the RT-based CIT was measured using two probes.

The resulting formulas for estimating premorbid FSIQ were highly significant and precise in predicting FSIQ scores of participants in the K-WAIS-IV normative sample. These equations provide a means for clinicians to estimate intellectual functioning in adults, and can be utilized as a method of estimating individuals premorbid functioning.

A recent trend in court is for defense attorneys to introduce brain scans and other forms of biomedical information (BI) into criminal trials as mitigating evidence. The present study investigates how BI, when considered in combination with a defendant's childhood information (CI), can influence the length of a defendant's sentence. We hypothesized that certain combinations of BI and CI result in shorter sentences because they suggest that the defendant poses less of a threat to society. Participants were asked to read accounts of the trial of a murder suspect and, based on the information therein, recommend a sentence as if they were the judge. The defendant was diagnosed with psychopathy, but biomedical information regarding that diagnosis was included or excluded depending on the BI condition. The defendant was further described as growing up in either a loving or abusive family. The results showed that, if BI was present in the trial account, the defendant from an abusive family was perceived as less of a threat to society and received a shorter recommended sentence than if the defendant had been from a loving family. If BI was absent from the account, the pattern was reversed: the defendant from a loving family was perceived as less of a threat to society and received a shorter recommended sentence than if he had been from an abusive family. Implications for the use of BI and CI in court trials are discussed, as well as their relationship to free will and the function of punishment as retribution and utility.

This article advances a method based on standard test theories and measurement models to determine correct verdicts for jury trials, and to estimate juror accuracy, juror ability, and trial difficulty (and the relationships among them). With five vignette cases and 1,318 juror eligible adults as the subjects, the model consistently identified verdicts that accorded with the judge's instructions on the law as correct. With the correct verdicts, the strength of the relationship between juror accuracy and juror ability was found to be substantial. These findings suggest that the assumption of equivalent accuracy of jurors underlying the Condorcet's jury theorem (Condorcet, Essai sur l'Application de l'Analyse a la Probabilite des Decisions Rendues a la Pluralite des Voix, Paris, 1785) may be untenable for general cases where jurors of diverse dispositions and abilities serve together; and that the role of juror ability in determining the accuracy of legal decisions could be more significant than that of attitudes and values because, unlike attitudes and values, ability could affect juror's legal decisions regardless of the type of the case.