An analysis of the effects of subjective and objective instruction forms on mock-juries' murder/manslaughter distinctions

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 26, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 605-623

  Spackman, Matthew P ^a   Belcher, Jann C ^a   Calapp, Justin W ^a   Taylor, Aaron ^a  

^a BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Defendants' emotions; Mitigating circumstances; Murder manslaughter distinctions

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COURT; CRIME; EMOTION; HOMICIDE; HUMAN; RATING SCALE; VICTIM; VIOLENCE; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTITUDE; CLASSIFICATION; CONSENSUS; DECISION MAKING; EVALUATION; FEMALE; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; JURISPRUDENCE; LEGAL ASPECT; MALE; MOTIVATION; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTITUDE; COMMUNICATION; CONSENSUS; DECISION MAKING; EMOTIONS; FEMALE; HOMICIDE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; JUDICIAL ROLE; MALE; MOTIVATION; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0036981671     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1020977400474     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Averill, J. A. (1979). Anger. In R. A. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation, 1978. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
2. Blue, J. C. (1990). Defining extreme emotional disturbance. Connecticut Bar Journal, 63, 473-482.
3. Coke, E. (1812). The first part of the institutes of the laws of England. Philadelphia: Johnson and Warner, and Samuel R. Fisher Jr.
4. Dressler, J. (1982). Rethinking heat of passion: A defense in search of a rationale. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 73(2), 421-470.
5. Finkel, N. J. (1989). The Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984: Much ado about nothing. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 7(3). 403-419.
6. Finkel, N. J. (1995a). Achilles fuming, Odysseus stewing, and Hamlet brooding: On the story of the murder/manslaughter distinction. Nebraska Law Review, 74(4), 742-803.
7. Finkel, N. J. (1995b). Commonsense Justice: Jurors' notions of the law. Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press.
8. Finkel, N. J. (1996). Culpability and commonsense justice: Lessons learned between murder and manslaughter. Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics, and Public Policy, 10(1), 11-64.
9. Finkel, N. J., & Handel, S. F. (1989). How jurors construe "insanity." Law and Human Behavior, 13(1), 41-59.
10. Finkel, N., Meister, K., & Lightfoot, D. (1991). The self-defense defense and community sentiment. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 585-602.
11. Follingstad, D. R., Shillinglaw, R. D., DeHart, D. D., & Kleinfelter, K. J. (1997). The impact of elements of self-defense and objective versus subjective instructions on jurors' verdicts for battered women defendants. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 729-747.
12. Hastie, R., Schkade, D. A., & Payne, J. W. (1998). A study of juror and jury judgments in civil cases: Deciding liability for punitive damages. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 287-314.
13. Heuer, L., & Penrod, S. (1989). Instructing jurors: A field experiment with written and preliminary instructions. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 409-430.
14. Howell, D. C. (1992). Statistical methods for psychology. Belmont, CA: Duxbury Press.
15. Institute, A. L. (1985). Model penal code. Philadelphia. PA: American Law Institute.
16. Kahan, D. M., & Nussbaum, M. C. (1996). Two conceptions of emotion in criminal law. Columbia Law Review, 96, 270-374.
17. Mathes, W., & Devitt, E. (1965). Federal jury practice and instructions: Civil and criminal. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.
18. Reifman, A., Gusick, S., & Ellsworth, P. (1992). Real jurors' understanding of the law in real cases. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 539-554.
19. Robinson, D. N. (1996). Wild beasts and idle humours: The insanity defense from antiquity to the present. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
20. Robinson, P., & Darley, J. (1995). Justice, liability, and blame. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
21. Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1991). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
22. Singer, R. (1986). The resurgence of mens rea: I - provocation, emotional disturbance, and the Model Penal Code. Boston College Law Review, 27(2), 243-322.
23. Spackman, M. P., Belcher, J. C., & Hansen, A. S. (in press). Effects of perceived emotional intensity on mock-jurors' murder/manslaughter distinctions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology: Biobehavioral Research.
24. Spackman, M. P., Belcher, J. C., & Sauls, A. (1999). Effects of perceived emotional intensity on attributions of responsibility for emotions. Paper presented at the joint conference of the American Psychology-Law Society and European Association of Psychology and Law, Dublin, Ireland.
25. Stasser, G., Kerr, N., & Davis, J. (1989). Influence processes and consensus models in decision-making groups. In P. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence (pp. 279-326). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
26. Terrance, C. A., Matheson, K., & Spanos, N. P. (2000). Effects of judicial instructions and case characteristics in a mock jury trial of battered women who kill. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 207-229.
27. Winer, B. J. (1971). Statistical principles in experimental design (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.