Sexual harassment stories: Testing a story-mediated model of juror decision-making in civil litigation

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 29-51

  Huntley, Jill E ^a   Costanzo, Mark ^a  

^a CLAREMONT MCKENNA COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Civil litigation; Juror decision making; Jury; Sexual harassment; Story model

Indexed keywords

CRIMINOLOGY; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; LAW SUIT; LEGAL ASPECT; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PREDICTION; PROCESS MODEL; REVIEW; SEXUAL HARASSMENT; ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; CIVIL RIGHTS; CONSENSUS; FEMALE; JURISPRUDENCE; LIFE EVENT; LITERATURE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; QUESTIONNAIRE; RACE; SEX DIFFERENCE; STATISTICAL MODEL; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; ANECDOTES; CIVIL RIGHTS; CONSENSUS; CONTINENTAL POPULATION GROUPS; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDICIAL ROLE; LIFE CHANGE EVENTS; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; QUESTIONNAIRES; SEX FACTORS; SEXUAL HARASSMENT; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0037314558     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1021674811225     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Bennett, W. L., & Feldman, M. S. (1981). Reconstructing reality in the courtroom. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
2. Casper, J. D., Benedict, K., & Perry, J. L. (1989). Juror decision making, attitudes, and the hindsight bias. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 291-310.
3. Costanzo, M., & Costanzo, S. (1992). Jury decision making in the capital penalty phase: Legal assumptions, empirical findings, and a research agenda. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 185-201.
4. Costanzo, M., & Peterson, J. (1994). Attorney persuasion in the capital penalty phase: A content analysis of closing arguments. Journal of Social Issues, 50(2), 125-147.
5. Diamond, S. S. (1990). Scientific jury selection: What social scientists know and do not know. Judicature, 73, 178-183.
6. Diamond, S. S., & Casper, J. D. (1992). Blindfolding the jury to verdict consequences: Damages, experts, and the civil jury. Law and Society Review, 26, 513-563.
7. Finkel, N. J. (1995). Commonsense justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8. Finkel, N. J. (1997). Commonsense justice, psychology, and the law: Prototypes that are common, senseful. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3, 461-489.
9. ForsterLee, L., Horowitz, I. A., & Bourgeois, M. (1993). Juror competence in civil trials: Effects of preinstruction and evidence technicality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 14-21.
10. Fulero, S. M., & Penrod, S. D. (1990). Attorney jury selection folklore: What do they think and how can psychologists help? Forensic Reports, 3, 233-259.
11. Gates, H. L., Jr. (1995, October 23). Thirteen ways of looking at a black man. The New Yorker, 56-65.
12. Goodman-Delahunty, J. (2000). Civil law: Employment and discrimination. In R. Roesch, S. D. Hart, & J. R. P. Ogloff (Eds.), Psychology and Law: The state of the discipline (pp. 277-337). New York: Plenum.
13. Goodman, J., Loftus, E. F., & Greene, E. (1990). Matters of money: Voir dire in civil cases. Forensic Reports, 3, 303-329.
14. Greene, E., Downey, C., & Goodman-Delahunty, J. (1999). Juror decisions about damages in employment discrimination cases. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 17, 107-121.
15. Gutek, B. A., & O'Connor, M. O. (1995). The empirical basis for the reasonable woman standard. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 151-166.
16. Hans, V. P., & Lofquist, W. S. (1992). Jurors' judgments of business liability in tort cases: Implications for the litigation explosion debate. Law and Society Review, 26, 85.
17. Hans, V. P., & Lofquist, W. S. (1994). Perceptions of civil justice: The litigation crisis attitudes of civil jurors. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 12, 181-196.
18. Mendoza-Dinton, R., Ayduk, O. N., Shoda, Y., & Mischel, W. (1997). Cognitive-affective processing system analysis of reactions to the O.J. Simpson criminal trial verdict. Journal of Social Issues, 53, 563-581.
19. Moore, A. J. (1989). Trial by schema: Cognitive filters in the courtroom. UCLA Law Review, 37, 273-341.
20. Moran, G., Cutler, B. L., & De Lisa, A. (1994). Attitudes toward tort reform, scientific jury selection, and juror bias: Verdict inclination in criminal and civil trials. Law and Psychology Review, 18, 309-328.
21. Neitzel, M. T., & Dillehay, R. C. (1986). Psychological consultation in the courtroom. New York: Pergamon.
22. Newman, L. F., Duff, K., Schnopp-Wyatt, N., Brock, B., & Hoffman, Y. (1997). Reactions to the O.J. Simpson verdict: (Mindless tribalism) or motivated inference processes? Journal of Social Issues, 53, 547-562.
23. Olsen-Fulero, L., & Fulero, S. M. (1997). Commonsense rape judgments: An empathy-complexity theory of rape juror story making. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3, 402-427.
24. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1988). Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 521-533.
25. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1990). Practical implications of psychological research on juror and jury decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 90-105.
26. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 189-206.
27. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1994). The story model for juror decision making. In R. Hastie (Ed.), Inside the juror (pp. 192-224). New York: Cambridge University Press.
28. Penrod, S. D. (1990). Predictors of jury decision making in criminal and civil cases: A field experiment. Forensic Reports, 3, 261-277.
29. Sherrod, D., & Mattson, L. G. (1993). Jury biases and their impact on verdict. Paper presented at the meeting of American Academy of Science, San Francisco.
30. Smith, V. L., & Studebaker, C. A. (1996). What do you expect?: The influence of people's prior knowledge of crime categories on fact-finding. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 517-532.
31. Strier, F. (1999). Whither trial consulting? Issues and projections. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 93-116.
32. Visher, C. A. (1987). Juror decision making: The importance of evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 11, 1-17.