Finishing strong: Recency effects in juror judgments

Basic and Applied Social Psychology

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 47-58

  Costabile, Kristi A ^a   Klein, Stanley B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 16244390516     PISSN: 01973533     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15324834basp2701_5     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Anderson, N. H. (1959). Test of a model for opinion change. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 371-381.
2. Anderson, N. H., & Hubert S. (1963). Effects of concomitant verbal recall on order effects in personality impression formation. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2, 379-391.
3. Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 1230-1240.
4. Bargh, J. A., & Thein, R. D. (1985). Individual construct accessibility, person memory, and the recall-judgment link: The case of information overload. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1129-1146.
5. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
6. Betz A. L., Cannon, K. M., & Skowronski, J. J. (1992). The moment of tenure and the moment of truth: When it pays to be aware of recency.effects in social judgments. Social Cognition, 10, 4, 397-413.
7. Carretta, T. R., & Moreland, R. L. (1983). The direct and indirect effects of in-admissible evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 75, 291-309.
8. Crowder, R. G. (1976). Principles of Learning and Memory. Oxford, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9. Furnham, A. (1986). The robustness of the recency effect: studies using legal evidence. The Journal of General Psychology, 113, 351-357.
10. Hastie, R., & Park, B. (1986). The relationship between memory and judgment depends on whether the judgment task is memory-based or on-line. Psychological Review, 93, 3, 258-268.
11. Hastorf, A. H., Schneider, D. J., & Polefka, J. (1970). Person Perception. Oxford, U.K: Addison-Wesley.
12. Kassin, S. M., & Sommers, S. (1997). Inadmissible testimony, instructions to disregard: substantive versus procedural considerations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1046-1054.
13. Kassin, S. M., & Studebaker, C. A. (1998). Instructions to disregard and the jury: Curative and paradoxical effects. In J. M. Golding & C. M. MacLeod (Eds.), Intentional Forgetting: Interdisciplinary Approaches (pp. 413-434). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
14. Kassin, Williams, & Saunders. (1990).
15. Kassin, S. M., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1988). The American Jury on Trial: Psychological Perspectives. New York: Hemisphere.
16. Kerstholt, J. H., & Jackson, J. L. (1998). Judicial decision making: Order of evidence presentation and availability of background information. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5, 445-454.
17. Lichtenstein, M., & Srull, T. K. (1987). Processing objectives as a determinant of the relationship between recall and judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 2, 93-118.
18. London, K., & Nunez, N. (2000). The effect of jury deliberations on jurors' propensity to disregard inadmissible evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 932-939.
19. Mueller, C. B., & Kirkpatrick, L. C. (1995). Modern evidence: Doctrine and practice. Boston: Little, Brown.
20. Murdock, B. B. (1974). Human Memory: Theory and data. Oxford, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
21. Otto, A. L., Penrod, S. D., & Dexter, H. R. (1994). The biasing impact of pretrial publicity on juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 453-469.
22. Pennington, D. C. (1982). Witnesses and their testimony: Effects of ordering on juror verdicts. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 12, 318-333.
23. Petty, R. E., Tormala, Z. L., Hawkins, C., & Wegner, D. T. (2001). Motivation to think and order effects in persuasion: The moderating role of chunking. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 332-344.
24. Pickel, K. (1995). Inducing jurors to disregard inadmissible evidence: A legal explanation does not help. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 407-423.
25. Pritchard, M. E., & Keenan, J. M. (2002). Does jury deliberation really improve jurors' memories? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 589-601.
26. Reyes, Thompson, & Bower. (1980)
27. Richter, L., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1998). Seizing on the latest: Motivationally driven recency effects in impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 4, 313-329.
28. Sommers, S. R., & Kassin, S. M. (2001) On the many impacts of inadmissible testimony: Selective compliance, need for cognition, and the overcorrection bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 10, 1368-1377.
29. Sue, S., Smith, R. E., & Caldwell, C. (1973). Effects of inadmissible evidence on the decisions of simulated jurors: A moral dilemma. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 3, 345-353.
30. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207-232.
31. Webster, D. M., Richter, L., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1996). On leaping to conclusions when feeling tired: Mental fatigue effects on impressional primacy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 181-195.
32. Wilson, W. (1971). Source Credibility and Order Effects. Psychological Reports, 29, 1303-1312.
33. Wyer, R. S., & Srull, T. K. (1986). Human cognition in its social context. Psychological Review, 93, 3, 322-359.
34. Wyer, R. S., & Srull, T. K. (1989) Memory and cognition in its social context. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.