Enhancing Juror Competence in a Complex Trial

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 305-319

  Forsterlee, Lynne ^a   Horowitz, Irwin A ^b  

^a CHARLES STURT UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0001591751     PISSN: 08884080     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199708)11:4<305::AID-ACP457>3.0.CO;2-J     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Aiken, E. G., Thomas, G. S. and Shennum, W. A. (1975). Memory for a lecture: effects of notes, lecture rate, and informational density. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 439-444.
2. Bourgeois, M. J., Horowitz, I. A. and ForsterLee, L. (1993). The effects of technicality and access to trial transcripts on verdicts and information processing in a civil trial. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 220-227.
3. Bourgeois, M. J., Horowitz, I. A., ForsterLee, L. and Grahe, H. (1995). Nominal and interactive groups: effects of preinstruction and deliberations on decisions and evidence recall in complex trials. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 58-67.
4. Carter, J. F. and Van Matre, N. H. (1975). Note taking versus note having. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 900-904.
5. Cather, C., Greene, E. and Durham, R. (1996). Plaintiff injury and defendant reprehensibility: implications for compensatory and punitive damages. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 189-205.
6. DiVesta, F. J. and Gray, G. S. (1973). Listening and notetaking: II. Immediate and delayed recall as functions of variations in thematic continuity, note taking, and length of listening-review intervals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 278-287.
7. Elwork, A., Sales, B. D. and Alfini, J. J. (1977). Juridic decisions: in ignorance of the law or in light of it? Law and Human Behavior, 1, 163-178.
8. Flango, V. E. (1980). Would jurors do a better job if they could take notes? Judicature, 63, 436-443.
9. FosterLee, L., Horowitz, I. A. and Bourgeois, M. J. (1993). Juror competence in civil trials: the effects of preinstruction and evidence technicality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 14-21.
10. FosterLee, L., Horowitz, I. A. and Bourgeois, M. (1994). Effects of notetaking on verdicts and evidence processing in a civil trial. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 567-578.
11. Hastie, R., Penrod, S. and Pennington, N. (1983). Inside the jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12. Heuer, L. and Penrod, S. (1988). Increasing jurors' participation in trials: a field experiment with jury notetaking and question asking. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 231-261.
13. Heuer, L. and Penrod, S. (1994). Juror notetaking and question asking during trials: a national field experiment. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 121-150.
14. Horowitz, I. A. and Bordens, K. S. (1990). An experimental investigation of procedural issues in toxic tort trials. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 269-286.
15. Peper, R. and Mayer, R. E. (1978). Note-taking as a generative activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 514-522.
16. Rosenhan, D. L., Eisner, S. L. and Robinson, R. J. (1994). Notetaking can aid juror recall. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 53-61.
17. Sand, L. B. and Reiss, S. A. (1985). A report on seven experiments conducted by district court judges in the second circuit. New York University Law Review, 60, 423-497.
18. Smith, V. L. (1991). Impact of pretrial instruction on jurors' information processing and decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 220-228.