Two experiments examined how mock jurors' beliefs about three factors known to influence eyewitness memory accuracy relate to decision making (age of eyewitness and presence of weapon in Study 1, length of eyewitness identification decision time in Study 2). Psychology undergraduates rendered verdicts and evaluated trial participants after reading a robberyÁmurder trial summary that varied eyewitness age (6, 11, 42, or 74 years) and weapon presence (visible or not) in Study 1 and eyewitness decision length (2Á3 or 30 s) in Study 2 (n 0 200 each). The interactions between participant belief about these variables and the manipulated variables themselves were the heart of this study. Participants' beliefs about eyewitness age and weapon presence interacted with these manipulations, but only for some judgments Á verdict for eyewitness age and eyewitness credibility for weapon focus. The exploratory meditational analyses found only one relation: juror belief about eyewitness age mediated the relation between eyewitness age and credibility ratings. These results highlight a need for juror education and specialized voir dire in cases where legitimate concerns exist regarding the reliability of eyewitness memory (e.g. child eyewitness, weapon presence during event, long eyewitness identification time). If erroneous juror beliefs can be corrected their impact may be reduced.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Punitive damages are a tool for punishing defendants who engage in reckless and wanton behaviors that cause injury to others. As with criminal punishment, goals of punitive damages include retribution, specific deterrence, and general deterrence. Unlike criminal punishment, however, some courts allow punitive damages to follow the death of defendants. To explore this issue, we first conducted a legal analysis of appellate court decisions concerning punitive damages against deceased defendants. While the majority of courts suggest that punitive damages against deceased individuals are not appropriate, some argue that favorable policy implications of allowing punitive damages to follow the defendant's death merit their survivability. Next, we conducted a simulation study to investigate the effects of defendant injury severity, including death, on juror decisions in a punitive damages case. Consistent with some judicial reasoning, mock jurors' liability and damage awards were not influenced by a defendant's injury severity, but defendant death did influence participants' self-reported goals of their punitive damage awards. We conclude with a discussion of policy and research implications.