The role of death qualification in venirepersons' attitudes toward the insanity defense

Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Volumn 36, Issue 7, 2006, Pages 1744-1757

  Butler, Brooke ^a   Wasserman, Adina W ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA SARASOTA MANATEE   (United States)

^b First Marketing ^*

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33745086867     PISSN: 00219029     EISSN: 15591816     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00079.x     Document Type: Review

References (29)

1. Bersoff, D. N. (1987). In the Supreme Court of the United States: Lockhart v. McCree. American Psychologist, 42, 59-68.
2. Butler, B. (2006). NGRI revisited: Venirepersons' attitudes toward the insanity defense. Journal of Applied Psychology, 36, (8).
3. Butler, B., & Moran, G. (2002). The role of death qualification in venirepersons' perceptions of aggravating and mitigating circumstances in capital trials. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 175-184.
4. Cowan, C. L., Thompson, W. C., & Ellsworth, P. C. (1984). The effects of death qualification on jurors' predisposition to convict and on the quality of deliberation. Law and Human Behavior, 8, 53-79.
5. Diamond, S. S. (1993). Instructing on death: Psychologist, juries, and judges. American Psychologist, 48, 423-434.
6. Dillehay, R. C., & Sandys, M. R. (1996). Life under Wainwright v. Witt: Juror dispositions and death qualification. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 147-165.
7. Ellsworth, P. C., Bukaty, R. M., Cowan, C. L., & Thompson, W. C. (1984). The death-qualified jury and the insanity defense. Law and Human Behavior, 8, 81-93.
8. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
9. Fitzgerald, R., & Ellsworth, P. C. (1984). Due process vs. crime control: Death qualification and jury attitudes. Law and Human Behavior, 8, 31-51.
10. Haney, C. (1984a). Examining death qualification: Further analysis of the process effect. Law and Human Behavior, 8, 133-151.
11. Haney, C. (1984b). On the selection of capital juries: The biasing effects of death qualification. Law and Human Behavior, 8, 121-132.
12. Haney, C., Hurtado, A., & Vega, L. (1994). "Modern" death qualification: New data on its biasing effects. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 619-633.
13. Hans, V. P. (1986). Death by jury. In K. C. Haas & J. A. Incardi (Eds.), Challenging capital punishment: Vol. 24. Legal and social science approaches (pp. 149-175). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
14. Lockhart v. McCree, 476 U.S. 162 (1986).
15. Luginbuhl, J. (1992). Comprehension of judges' instructions in the penalty phase of a capital trial: Focus on mitigating circumstances. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 203-218.
16. Luginbuhl, J., & Middendorf, K. (1988). Death penalty beliefs and jurors' responses to aggravating and mitigating circumstances in capital trials. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 263-281.
17. Lynch, M., & Haney, C. (2000). Discrimination and instructional comprehension: Guided discretion, racial bias, and the death penalty. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 337-358.
18. Moran, G., & Comfort, J. C. (1986). Neither "tentative" nor "fragmentary": Verdict preference of impaneled felony jurors as a function of attitude toward capital punishment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 146-155.
19. Neises, M. L., & Dillehay, R. C. (1987). Death qualification and conviction proneness: Witt and Witherspoon compared. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 5, 479-494.
20. Regina v. McNaughton, 10 Cl. and F. 200, 8 Eng. Rep. 718 (1843).
21. Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002).
22. Robinson, R. J. (1993). What does "unwilling to impose the death penalty" mean anyway? Another look at excludable jurors. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 471-477.
23. Thompson, W. C., Cowan, C. L., Ellsworth, P. C., & Harrington, J. C. (1984). Death penalty attitudes and conviction proneness: The translation of attitudes into verdicts. Law and Human Behavior, 8, 95-113.
24. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
25. U.S. v. Brawner, 471 F.2d 969 (D.C. Cir, 1972).
26. Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 (1985).
27. White, L. T. (1987). The mental illness defense in the capital penalty hearing. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 5, 411-421.
28. Wiener, R. L., Prichard, C. C., & Weston, M. (1995). Comprehensibility of approved jury instructions in capital murder cases. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 455-467.
29. Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (1968).