Examining legal authoritarianism in the impact of punishment severity on juror decisions

Jones, Angela; Jones, Shayne; Penrod, Steven D.

doi:10.1080/1068316x.2015.1077244

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Both Kassin et al () and Redlich et al (2014) examined individual differences in perceptions of technique effectiveness and use among law enforcement samples. More broadly, individual differences have been extensively examined in the context of legal decisions (e.g., Devine & Caughlin, ; Jones, Jones, & Penrod, ). Two such personality characteristics that may influence perceptions of police interrogations are Belief in a Just World (BJW) and Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lay perceptions of interrogation techniques: Identifying the role of Belief in a Just World and Right Wing Authoritarianism

Jones

Brimbal

2017

Journal Invest Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

False confessions due to overtly coercive interrogation techniques have led to the development of more ethically-minded alternative techniques. Several studies have surveyed the public about their perceptions of confession-oriented techniques (e.g., Leo & Liu, 2009), although none have examined the use of information gathering and strategic interviewing techniques or individual differences in such perceptions. Thus, the current study assessed public perceptions of a wide variety of techniques by recruiting a total of 332 participants. Results indicated that our participants would rather risk releasing a guilty person than convicting an innocent. Overall, confession-oriented techniques were rated the least acceptable and effective across participants. However, perceptions of these techniques varied as a function of Belief in a Just World (BJW; Lipkus, 1991) and Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA; Zakrisson, 2005).Specifically, those higher in these two individual differences found confession-oriented techniques to be both more acceptable and effective than those scoring lower on these measures. The results speak to the importance of individual differences and the potential for such differences to bias juror decision-making when interrogation evidence is at stake.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lay perceptions of interrogation techniques: Identifying the role of Belief in a Just World and Right Wing Authoritarianism

Jones

Brimbal

2017

Journal Invest Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conversely, if participants perceive a penalty substitute as signaling a need to strongly deter excessive contractual terms, or to help customers as much as possible, they might be most inclined to invalidate the questionable term under the penalty substitute. This hypothesis draws on the finding that some people are more inclined to convict a defendant in criminal proceedings when the punishment is more severe (Jones, Jones, and Penrod 2015; Zamir, Harlev, and Ritov 2017, 138–41).…”

Section: The Endogeneity Of Unenforceabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, if participants believe that they should not be influenced by the substitute arrangement when determining whether a certain term should be invalidated, they would be equally inclined to invalidate the term in all three substitute conditions. Of course, it is also possible that the impact of the substitute varies across decision makers, depending on which of the above arguments appeal to them most (compare Jones, Jones, and Penrod 2015).…”

Section: The Endogeneity Of Unenforceabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Substituting Invalid Contract Terms: Theory and Preliminary Empirical Findings

Katz¹,

Zamir²

2022

Law Soc. Inq.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The law often lays down mandatory rules, from which the parties may deviate in favor of one party but not the other. Examples include the invalidation of high-liquidated damages and the unenforceability of excessive noncompete clauses in employment contracts. In these cases, the law may substitute the invalid term with a moderate arrangement, with a punitive arrangement that strongly favors the protected party, or with a minimally tolerable arrangement (MTA), which preserves the original term as much as is tolerable. This article revisits the choice between the various substitutes. Based on theoretical analysis and five new empirical studies (N = 2,089), it argues that the incidence of MTAs should be rather limited. It demonstrates that people find moderate substitute arrangements more attractive than the alternatives. It also points to two overlooked incentive effects of the substitute arrangement (in addition to its impact on the drafting of contracts). First, the applicable substitute strongly influences customers’ inclination to challenge excessive contract terms once a dispute arises. Second, when the invalidation of an excessive term is discretionary, the applicable substitute can affect decision makers’ inclination to invalidate excessive clauses in the first place.

show abstract

“…1818See Simon and Mahan (1971) for an early empirical study of this effect, and see Jones et al. (2015) for discussion of recent literature.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Pragmatic encroachment and legal proof

Moss¹

2021

Philosophical Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

know that they're guilty. Your belief that the defendant is guilty is like the belief that a particular lottery ticket is not going to win the lottery. It is very likely on your evidence, but it doesn't amount to knowledge. As I have argued elsewhere, legal proof requires knowledge. 1 A defendant is proven guilty only if the factfinder knows that the defendant is guilty, where this knowledge is grounded in the evidence admitted at trial. Suppose that's right. 2 Here is a second claim about knowledge: whether you know something can depend on the stakes. If you have a belief that is supported by plenty of evidence, but it would be disastrous for you to act on your belief if your belief turned out to be false, then it may be hard for your belief to be knowledge, even if it is actually true. As some would put it, knowledge is subject to pragmatic encroachment. Here's an illustration: 3Chocolate: Ishani and Brian are eating some holiday snacks from their friend Chandra, including some carob brownies.Ishani: These chocolate brownies are fantastic.Brian: Actually, Chandra has been really into making everything with carob lately, so these brownies don't have chocolate in them.Ishani: Oh, so we could serve them at the party tonight, without getting the kids all hyped up on caffeine.Brian: Hang on, I better check about the carob. One of the kids coming over has a lifethreatening chocolate allergy, so we should be absolutely sure not to serve any chocolate.

show abstract

Examining legal authoritarianism in the impact of punishment severity on juror decisions

Abstract: Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 05:45 11 August 2015

Cited by 9 publications

References 25 publications

Lay perceptions of interrogation techniques: Identifying the role of Belief in a Just World and Right Wing Authoritarianism

Lay perceptions of interrogation techniques: Identifying the role of Belief in a Just World and Right Wing Authoritarianism

Substituting Invalid Contract Terms: Theory and Preliminary Empirical Findings

Pragmatic encroachment and legal proof

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About