Social science data and the Supreme Court: Lockhart as a case in point.

Bersoff, Donald N.

doi:10.1037/0003-066x.42.1.52

Cited by 57 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Social scientists responded vigorously to Witherspoon's implicit invitation to muster additional evidence about whether "death-qualified" juries are conviction-prone and/or fail to represent a fair cross-section of the relevant community (Haney 1984). The ultimate judicial reception of this evidence (or, as it turned out, the lack thereof) occurred in Lockhart v. McCree (1986), a case not included in this study (see Bersoff 1987;Ellsworth 1988:189-205).…”

Section: The Use Of Social Science Research In Supreme Court Capital mentioning

confidence: 89%

Social science in supreme court death penalty cases: Citation practices and their implications

Acker

1991

Justice Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Use Of Social Science Research In Supreme Court Capital mentioning

confidence: 89%

Social science in supreme court death penalty cases: Citation practices and their implications

Acker

1991

Justice Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…His appeal eventually reached the Supreme Court. Bersoff (1987) gives an account of the history and progress in the case. Psychological data were brought to bear in the case through the procedure of an amicus curiae brief.…”

Section: ' Death Qualification'mentioning

confidence: 99%

The benefits of legal psychology: Possibilities, practice and dilemmas

Lloyd-Bostock

1988

British J of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The law is in some ways an obvious area where psychology could be of benefit. Many of the problems the law and legal procedures deal with are essentially psychological in nature. Law, like psychology, is fundamentally concerned with how people think, feel and behave; with the causes and modification of behaviour; and with the processes of perception, memory and decision theory. At the same time, law is a particularly difficult area for psychologists to tackle, not only for scientific, but also for ethical and political reasons. The role and functions of legal institutions such as juries and courts are by no means straightforward and the prima facie relevance of psychology can be deceptive. Moreover, even when psychology clearly has a relevant contribution to make, attempts to exert real influence on legal decisions or policy can be frustrating. A certain amount of scepticism on the part of lawyers is healthy. But the influence of psychology in legal contexts frequently has less to do with the quality of the psychology than with professional, political and organizational considerations. Given the breadth of the field, this article is inevitably selective in the research and practice discussed. I shall not attempt to offer a comprehensive review of current work and its possible benefits. Rather, I aim to illustrate the range of topics, and the possibilities and difficulties in legal psychology using examples of recent research and attempts to influence legal decisions and legal policy. I first sketch briefly the growth of legal psychology.

show abstract

“…The death penalty thereby demands a greater degree of reliability in its application (Lockett v. Ohio, 1978). However, prior research suggests that significant problems exist with the administration of capital punishment (Wolfers, 2006;Beck and Shumsky, 1997;Bersoff, 1987;Bersoff and Ogden, 1987;Bowers, 1983) and considerable contention currently surrounds the use of mental health evidence in the system (Deitchman et al, 1991;United States v. Fields, 2007). It has been found that verdicts of guilt are not always synonymous with actual responsibility for the crime (Scheck et al, 2000;Wells et al, 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%