Effects of group size and procedural influence on consensual judgments of quantity: The example of damage awards and mock civil juries

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Volumn 73, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 703-718

  Davis, James H ^a   Hulbert, Lorne ^b   Au, Wing Tung ^c   Chen, Xiao Ping ^d   Zarnoth, Paul ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF KENT   (United Kingdom)

^c CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

^d HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 18644372693     PISSN: 00223514     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.73.4.703     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Anderson, L. R., & Ager, J. W. (1978). Analysis of variance in small group research. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 341-345.
2. Black, D. (1958). The theory of committees and elections. New York: Cambridge University Press.
3. Bray, R. M., Kerr, N. L., & Atkin, R. S. (1978). Effects of group size, problem difficulty, and sex on group performance and member reactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1224-1240.
4. Cialdini, R. B., Kallgren, C. A., & Reno, R. R. (1991). A focus theory of normative conduct: A theoretical refinement and reevaluation of the role of norms in human behavior. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 24, pp. 201-234). New York: Academic Press.
5. Crott, H. W., Werner, J., & Hoffmann, C. (1996). A probabilistic model of opinion change considering distance between alternatives: An application to mock jury data. In E. Witte & J. H. Davis (Eds.), Understanding group behavior: Consensual action by small groups (Vol. 1, pp. 15-33). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. Crott, H. W., Zuber, J. A., & Schermer, T. (1986). Social decision schemes and choice shift: An analysis of group decisions among bets. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 1-21.
7. Davis, J. H. (1973). Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes. Psychological Review, 80, 97-125.
8. Davis, J. H. (1980). Group decision and procedural justice. In M. Fishbein (Ed.), Progress in social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 157-229). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Davis, J. H. (1982). Social interaction as a combinatorial process in group decision. In H. Brandstatter, J. H. Davis, & G. Stocker-Kreichgauer (Eds.), Group decision making (pp. 27-79). London: Academic Press.
10. Davis, J. H. (1989). Psychology and law: The last fifteen years. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19, 199-230.
11. Davis, J. H., Bray, R. M., & Holt, R. W. (1977). The empirical study of decision processes in juries: A critical review. In J. L. Tapp & F. J. Levine (Eds.), Law, justice, and the individual in society: Psychological and legal issues (pp. 326-361). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
12. Davis, J. H., & Kerr, N. L. (1986). Thought experiments and the problem of sparse data in small group performance research. In P. S. Goodman (Ed.), Designing effective work groups (pp. 305-349). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
13. Davis, J. H., Kameda, T., Parks, C., Stasson, M., & Zimmerman, S. (1989). Some social mechanics of group decision making: The distribution of opinion, polling sequence, and implications for consensus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 100-114.
14. Davis, J. H., Kerr, N. L., Sussman, M., & Rissman, A. K. (1974). Social decision schemes under risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 248-271.
15. Davis, J. H., Stasson, M., Ono, K., & Zimmerman, S. (1988). Effects of straw polls on group decision making: Sequential voting pattern, timing, and local majorities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 918-926.
16. Davis, J. H., Stasson, M. F., Parks, C. D., Hulbert, L., Kameda, T., Zimmerman, S. K., & Ono, K. (1993). Quantitative decisions by groups and individuals: Voting procedures and monetary awards by mock civil juries. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 326-346.
17. Eakin, B. A. (1975). An empirical study of the effect of leadership influence on decision outcomes in different sized jury panels. Kansas Journal of Sociology, 11, 109-126.
18. Eisenberg, T., & Clermont, K. M. (1997). Judicial statistical inquiry form [On-line]. Available: http://teddy.law.cornell.edu:8090/ questata.htm.
19. Gerbasi, K. C., Zuckerman, M., & Reis, H. T. (1977). Justice needs a new blindfold: A review of mock jury research. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 323-345.
20. Hastie, R., Penrod, S., & Pennington, N. (1983). Inside the jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21. Kalven, H., & Zeisel, H. (1966). The American jury. Boston: Little, Brown.
22. Kaplan, M. F., & Miller, C. E. (1987). Group decision making and normative versus informational influence: Effects of type of issue and assigned decision rule. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 306-313.
23. Kashy, D. A., & Kenny, D. A. (in press). The analysis of data from dyads and groups. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social psychology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
24. Kenny, D. A., & Judd, C. M. (1986). Consequences of violating the independence assumption in analysis of variance. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 422-431.
25. Kerr, N. L., Davis, J. H., Meek, D., & Rissman, A. K. (1975). Group position as a function of member attitudes: Choice shift effects from the perspective of social decision scheme theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 574-593.
26. Kerr, N. L., Stasser, G., & Davis, J. H. (1979). Model testing, model fitting, and social decision schemes. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23, 299-410.
27. Kerr, N. L., & MacCoun, R. J. (1985). The effects of jury size and polling method on the process and product of jury deliberations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 349-363.
28. Laughlin, P. R., & Ellis, A. L. (1986). Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 22, 177-189.
29. Lorge, I., & Solomon, H. (1955). Two models of group behavior in the solution of Eureka-type problems. Psychometrika, 20, 139-148.
30. MacCoun, R. J. (1993). Inside the black box: What empirical research tells us about decision making by civil juries. In R. E. Litan (Ed.), Verdict: Assessing the civil jury system (pp. 137-180). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institute.
31. MacCoun, R. J. (1996). Differential treatment of corporate defendants by juries: An examination of the "deep-pockets" hypothesis. Law and Society Review, 30, 121-132.
32. Mirkin, B. G. (1979). Group choice. New York: Winston/Wiley.
33. Moscovici, S. (1976). Social influence and social change. London: Academic Press.
34. Mueller, D. C. (1989). Public choice II. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
35. Myers, J. L., DiCecco, J. V., & Lorch, R. F. (1981). Group dynamics and individual performances: Pseudogroup and quasi-F analyses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 86-98.
36. Nagao, D. H., & Davis, J. H. (1980). Some implications of temporal drift in social parameters. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 479-496.
37. Pérez-Peña, R. (1994, June 17). U.S. juries grow tougher on those seeking damages. New York Times, p. A2.
38. Smoke, W. H., & Zajonc, R. B. (1962). On the reliability of group judgments and decisions. In J. H. Crisswell, H. Solomon, & P. Suppes (Eds.), Mathematical methods in small group processes (pp. 322-333). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
39. Stasser, G., Kerr, N. L., & Davis, J. H. (1989). Influence processes and consensus models in decision-making groups. In P. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence (2nd ed., pp. 431-477). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
40. Vollrath, D. A., & Davis, J. H. (1980). Jury size and decision rule. In R. J. Simon (Ed.), The jury: Its role in American society (pp. 73-106). Lexington, MA: Lexington.