Jury Decision Making: Implications For and From Psychology

Abstract

Jury trials play a centrally important role in the law, and they are also of interest to psychologists. The manner in which individual jurors perceive, interpret, and remember evidence, as well as the group processes involved in jury deliberation, can be described in terms of fundamental cognitive and social psychological concepts. Juries provide a real-world laboratory for examining theoretical issues related to reasoning, memory, judgment and decision making, attribution, stereotyping, persuasion, and group behavior. Conversely, psychological research can inform trial procedures, enabling juries to benefit from fairer procedures and reach better outcomes. Thus, jury decision making has implications for psychological theory, and psychological research has implications for legal policy.

Juror Decision Making in Acquaintance and Marital Rape: The Influence of Clothing, Alcohol, and Preexisting Stereotypical Attitudes

“…Nevertheless, empirical studies using written materials do not necessarily differ from real outcomes (for a review see Bornstein, 1999). Furthermore, individual juror verdicts strongly predict overall final group verdicts, whereby minorities conform to the majority (Bornstein & Greene, 2011;Salerno & Diamond, 2010). Finally, this research only investigated heterosexual rape, employing photographs of white adults of approximate university undergraduate age.…”

Does the Narrative Style of Video Evidence Influence Judgements About Rape Complainant Testimony?

“…The well-documented concern that the experimental control used in mock juror studies compromises ecological validity is a limitation of the present series of studies (Bornstein & Greene, 2011;Diamond, 1997;Kerr & Bray, 1982). We addressed these concerns to some degree by using a community sample of participants who were jury eligible owing to age, but some of these participants may have been excluded from jury service for other reasons (e.g.…”

Validating workplace-based assessments: continuity, synthesis and a qualitative heart

“…Although the consensus‐based tactic is an appealing approach to synthesis, studies from social psychology and small‐group research highlight the vulnerabilities of group decision making, such as ‘groupthink’, the tendency to fixate on a small or widely shared sample of information rather than considering the whole pool of evidence, and the paying of deference to the person with the most status or influence . All four criteria from qualitative research (credibility, dependability, confirmability and transferability) are important to apply to synthesis to ensure the trustworthiness of group judgements.…”