Factors affecting the use of naked statistical evidence of liability

Journal of Social Psychology

Volumn 136, Issue 6, 1996, Pages 677-688

  Wright, Edward F ^a   Maceachern, Lora ^a   Stoffer, Elaine ^a   Macdonald, Nancy ^a  

^a ST FRANCIS XAVIER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030352831     PISSN: 00224545     EISSN: 19401183     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00224545.1996.9712244     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267-299). San Diego: Academic Press.
2. Allen, R. J. (1986). A reconceptualization of civil trials. Boston University Law Review, 66, 401-437.
3. Anderson, C. A. (1982). Inoculation and counterexplanation: Debiasing techniques in the perseverance of social theories. Social Cognition, I, 126-139.
4. Argote, L., Devadas, R., & Melone, N. (1990). The base-rate fallacy: Contrasting processes and outcomes of group and individual judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 46, 296-310.
5. Ball, V. C. (1961). The moment of truth: Probability theory and standards of proof. Vanderbilt Law Review. 14. 807-821.
6. Brook, J. (1985). The use of statistical evidence of identification in civil litigation: Well-worn hypotheticals, real cases, and controversy. St. Louis University Law Journal, 29, 293-352.
7. Bumstein, E. (1982). Persuasion as argument processing. In H. Brandstatter, J. H. Davis, & G. Stocher-Kreichgauer (Eds.), Contemporary problems in group decision-making (pp. 103-124). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
8. Callen, C. R. (1982). Notes on a grand illusion: Some limits on the use of Bayesian theory in evidence law. Indiana Law Journal. 57, 1-44.
9. Carlson, R. A., & Dulaney, D. E. (1988). Diagnostic reasoning with circumstantial evidence. Cognitive Psychology. 20, 463-492.
10. Cohen, L. J. (1977). The probable and the provable. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
11. Cohen, L. J. (1981). Subjective probability and the paradox of the gate crasher. Arizona State Law Journal, 52. 627-656.
12. Cohen, L. J. (1986). The role of evidential weight in criminal proof. Boston University Law Review. 66. 635-649.
13. Connolly, T. (1987). Decision theory, reasonable doubt, and the utility of erroneous acquittals. Law and Human Behavior, 2. 101-112.
14. Dane, F. C. (1985). In search of reasonable doubt. Law and Human Behavior. 9, 141-158.
15. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87, 215-251.
16. Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
17. Kagehiro, D. K., & Stanton, W. C. (1985). Legal vs. quantified definitions of standards of proof. Law and Human Behavior, 9, 159-178.
18. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjectivity probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430-454.
19. Kaplan, M. F. (1977). Discussion polarization effects in a modified jury decision paradigm: Informational influences. Sociometry, 40, 262-271.
20. Kaye, D. (1979). The law of probability and the law of the land. University of Chicago Law Review, 47, 34-56.
21. Kaye, D. H. (1982). The limits of the preponderance of the evidence standard: Justifiably naked statistical evidence and multiple causation. American Bar Foundation Research Journal, 2, 487-515.
22. Kaye, D. H. (1986). Comment. Boston University Law Review, 66, 657-672.
23. Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 192-240). Lincoln: University of Nebraska.
24. Kerr, N. L., Atkin, R. S., Stasser, G., Meek, D., Holt, R. W., & Davis, J. H. (1976). Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt: Effects of concept definition and assigned decision rule on the judgments of mock jurors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 282-294.
25. Koehler, J. J., & Shaviro, D. N. (1990). Veridical verdicts: Increasing verdict accuracy through the use of overtly probabilistic evidence and methods. Cornell Law Review, 75, 247-279.
26. Lempert, R. (1977). Modeling relevance. Michigan Law Review, 75, 1021-1057.
27. Lempert, R. (1986). The new evidence scholarship: Analyzing the process of proof. Boston University Law Review, 66, 439-477.
28. McCormick, C. (1984). Handbook of the law of evidence (3rd ed.). St. Paul, MN: West.
29. Nagel, S. (1979). Bringing the values of jurors in line with the law. Judicature, 63, 189-195.
30. Nesson, C. (1985). The evidence or the event? On judicial proof and the acceptability of verdicts. Harvard Law Review, 98, 1357-1392.
31. Nesson, C. (1986). Agent Orange meets the blue bus: Factfinding at the frontier of knowledge. Boston University Law Review, 66, 521-539.
32. Nisbett, R. E., & Borgida, E. (1975). Attribution and the psychology of prediction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 932-943.
33. Ostrom, T. M., Werner, C., & Saks, M. J. (1978). An integration theory analysis of jurors' presumptions of guilt or innocence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 436-450.
34. Petty, R. E., Harkins, S. G., & Williams, K. D. (1980). The effects of group diffusion of cognitive effort on attitudes: An information-processing view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 81-92.
35. Posner, R. (1972). Economic analysis of the law. Boston: Little, Brown.
36. Simon, R. J. (1969). Judges' translations of burdens of proof into statements of probability. Trial Lawyers' Guide, 38, 103-114.
37. Simon, R. J. (1970). Beyond a reasonable doubt: An experimental attempt at quantification. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 6, 203-209.
38. Tesser, A. (1978). Self-generated attitude change. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 11, pp. 289-338). San Diego: Academic Press.
39. Tesser, A., & Leone, C. (1977). Cognitive schemas and thought as determinants of attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 340-356.
40. Thomas, E. A. C., & Hogue, A. (1976). Apparent weight of evidence, decision criteria, and confidence ratings in juror decision making. Psychological Review, 83, 442-465.
41. Thompson, W. C. (1989). Are juries competent to evaluate statistical evidence? Law and Contemporary Problems, 52. 9-41.
42. Tribe, L. H. (1971). Trial by mathematics: Precision and ritual in the legal process. Harvard Law Review. 84, 1329-1393.
43. Vinokur, A., & Burnstein, E. (1974). Effects of partially shared persuasive arguments on group-induced shifts: A group-problem-solving approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, 305-315.
44. Walster, E., Walster, G. W., & Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity: Theory and research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
45. Wells, G. L. (1992). Naked statistical evidence of liability: Is subjective probability enough? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 739-752.
46. Wright, E. F., Christie, S. D., Johnson, R. W., & Stoffer, E. S. (1996). The impact of group discussion on the theory-perseverance bias. The Journal of Social Psychology, 136. 85-98.
47. Wright, E. F., Liius, C. A. E., & Christie, S. D. (1990). Does group discussion facilitate the use of consensus information in making causal attributions? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 261-269.
48. Wright, E. F., & Wells, G. L. (1985). Does group discussion attenuate the dispositional bias? Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 15, 531-546.