The influence of limiting instructions on processing and judgments of emotionally evocative evidence

Psychiatry, Psychology and Law

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 110-123

  Cush, Rachel K ^a   Delahunty, Jane Goodman ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AMBIGUITY; ARTICLE; COGNITION; COURT; CRIMINAL JUSTICE; DECISION MAKING; EMOTION; EMOTIONALITY; FEMALE; HOMICIDE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; JURISPRUDENCE; LEGAL ASPECT; LEGAL EVIDENCE; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MALE; PHOTOGRAPHY; PROBATION; PSYCHOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SELF MONITORING; VICTIM;

EID: 33746342436     PISSN: 13218719     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1375/pplt.13.1.110     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Australian Law Reform Commission. (1985). Evidence (Vol. 26). Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
2. Brehm, J. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. New York: Academic Press.
3. Bright, D.A., & Goodman-Delahunty, J. (2004). The influence of gruesome verbal evidence on mock juror verdicts. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 11, 154-166.
4. Broeder, D.W. (1959). The University of Chicago jury project. Nebraska Law Review, 88, 744-760.
5. Carlson, K.A., & Russo, J.E. (2001). Biased interpretation of evidence by mock jurors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 91-103.
6. Carter v Kentucky, 450 U.S. 288 (1981).
7. Clore, G.L. (1992). Cognitive phenomenology: Feelings and the construction of judgment. In L.L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), The construction of social judgments (pp. 133-163). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
8. Cox, M., & Tanford, S. (1989). Effects of evidence and instructions in civil trials: An experimental investigation of the rules of admissibility. Social Behavior, 4, 31-55.
9. DeSteno, D., Petty, R.E., Rucker, D.D., Wegener, D.T., & Braverman, J. (2004). Discrete emotions and persuasion: The role of emotion-induced expectancies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 43-56.
10. Doob, A.N., & Kirshenbaum, H.M. (1973). Some empirical evidence on the effect of s. 12 of the Canada Evidence Act upon an accused. The Criminal Law Quarterly, 15, 88-96.
11. Douglas, K.S., Lyon, D.R., & Ogloff, J.R.P. (1997). The impact of graphic photographic evidence on mock juror decisions in a murder trial: Probative or prejudicial? Law and Human Behavior, 21, 485-501.
12. DPP v Weiss [2002] VSC 17.
13. Driscoll v The Queen (1977) 137 CLR 517.
14. Edwards, K., & Bryan, T.S. (1997). Judgmental biases produced by instructions to disregard: The (paradoxical) case of emotional evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 849-864.
15. Evidence Act 1995 (Cth)
16. Federal Rules of Evidence. (2004). Binghampton, NY: Gould.
17. Forgas, J.P. (1995). Mood and judgment: The affect infusion model (AIM). Psychological Bulletin, 117, 39-66.
18. ForsterLee, L., & Horowitz, I.A. (1997). Enhancing juror competence in a complex trial. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, 305-319.
19. Frank, J. (1949). Courts on trial. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
20. Frey, D. (1982). Different levels of cognitive dissonance, information seeking, and information avoidance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 1175-1183.
21. Green, E., & Dodge, M. (1995). The influence of prior record evidence on juror decision making. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 67-77.
22. Heuer, L., & Penrod, S.D. (1989). Instructing jurors: A field experiment with written and preliminary instructions. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 409-430.
23. Jack Taiheke Wyllie v The Queen [2001] NZCA 79.
24. Jacobs v Singletary, 952 F2d 1282, 1296 (11th Cir, 1992).
25. Jeffrey v Black [1978] QB 490.
26. Jury Act 1977 (NSW) Sydney: Government Printer.
27. Kassin, S.M., & Garfield, D.A. (1991). Blood and guts: General and trial specific effects of videotaped crime scenes on mock juror verdicts. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 1456-1472.
28. Kassin, S.M., & Wrightsman, L.S. (1979). On the requirement of proof: The timing of judicial instructions and mock juror verdicts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1877-1887.
29. Kozul v The Queen (1981) 147 CLR 221.
30. Kramer, G.P., Kerr, N.L., & Carroll, J.S. (1990). Pretrial publicity, judicial remedies, and jury bias. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 409-438.
31. Lieberman, J.D., & Arndt, J. (2000). Understanding the limits of limiting instructions: Social psychological explanations for the failures of instructions to disregard pre-trial publicity and other inadmissible evidence. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6, 677-711.
32. London, K., & Nunez, N. (2000). The effects of jury deliberations on jurors' propensity to disregard inadmissible evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 932-939.
33. McInerney J. (1992). Report of inquiry held under section 475 of the Crimes Act 1900 into the conviction of Johann Ernst Siegfried Pohl at Central Criminal Court Sydney on 2 November 1973. Sydney.
34. Nisbett, R.E., & Wilson, T.D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on memory processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231-259.
35. NSW Law Reform Commission. (1986). Criminal Procedure: The jury in a criminal trial (Report 48). Sydney: Government Printer.
36. Oliver, E., & Griffin, W. (1976). Emotional arousal and "objective" judgment. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 8, 399-400.
37. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1993). The story model for juror decision making. In R. Hastie (Ed.) Inside the juror (pp. 192-221).
38. Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. London (UK): Home Office.
39. Prettyman, E.B. (1960). Jury instructions - First or last? American Bar Association Journal, 46, 10-66.
40. Pszczynski, T., & Wrightsman, L.S. (1981). The effects of opening statements on mock jurors' verdicts in a simulated criminal trial. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 11, 301-313.
41. R v Adey [1998] EWCA Crim 781.
42. R v Baptiste, [2000] O.J. No. 1639.
43. R v Bowhay (No. 3) [1998] NSWSC 660.
44. R v Hawkins and Boatswain [2003] SADC 116.
45. R v Kellisar [1999] VSC 356.
46. R v Kinkead, [1999] O.J. No. 1498.
47. R v MacKay, 2002 SKQB 180.
48. R v Morehouse, 2004 ABQB 97.
49. R v P. (R) (1990), 58 CCC (3d) 334.
50. R v Salmon (1972), 10 CCC (2d) 184 (Ont. C.A.).
51. R v Schaefler [1993] O.J. No. 71.
52. R v Telford (1996) 86 A Crim R 427.
53. R v Underwood, 2002, ABCA 310.
54. R v Zammit [1999] NSWCCA 65.
55. Schul, Y. (1993). When warning succeeds: The effect of warning on success in ignoring invalid information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 42-62.
56. Schwartz, N., & Clore, G. (1988). How do I feel about it? The informative function of affective states. In K. Fiedler & J. Forgas (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and social behavior (pp. 44-62). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Hogrefe International.
57. Sealy, A.P., & Cornish, W.R. (1973, April). Juries and the rules of evidence. Criminal Law Review, 208-223.
58. Semmler, C., & Brewer, N. (2002). Effects of mood and emotion on juror processing and judgments. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 20, 423-436.
59. Simon, R.J. (1966). Murder, juries, and the press. Trans-action, 64-65.
60. Smith, V.L. (1991). Impact of pretrial instruction on jurors' information processing and decision-making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 220-228.
61. Sue, S., Smith, R.E., & Pedroza, G. (1975). Authoritarianism, pretrial publicity, and awareness of bias in simulated jurors. Psychological Reports, 37, 1299-1302.
62. United States v Moccia, 681 F. 2d 61, 63 (CA1 1982).
63. United States v Treas-Wilson, 3 F.3d 1406, 1409-10 (10th Cir. 1993).
64. Wegner, D.M., & Erber, R. (1992). The hyperaccessibility of suppressed thoughts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 903-912.
65. Wegner, D.M., Coulton, G.F., & Wenzlaff, R. (1985). The transparency of denial: Briefing in the debriefing paradigm, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 338-346.
66. Wegner, D.M., Erber, R., & Zanakos, S. (1993). Ironic processes in the mental control of mood and mood-related thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1093-1104.
67. Weinberg, H.I., & Baron, R.S. (1982). The discredible eyewitness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 60-67.
68. Whalen, D.H., & Blanchard, F.A. (1982). Effects of photographic evidence on mock juror judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 12, 30-41.
69. Wilson, T.D., Houston, C.E., Etling, K.M., & Brekke, N. (1993). A new look at anchoring effects: Basic anchoring and its antecedents. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 125, 387-402.
70. Wilson, T.D., & Brekke, N. (1994). Mental contamination and mental correction: Unwanted influences on judgments and evaluations. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 117-142.
71. Wissler, R.L., & Saks, M.J. (1985). On the inefficacy of limiting instructions. Law and Human Behavior, 9, 37-48.
72. Wolf, S., & Montgomery, D.A. (1977). Effects of inadmissible evidence and level of judicial admonishment to disregard on the judgments of mock jurors. Journal of Applied and Social Psychology, 7, 205-219.
73. Zajonc, R.B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, 151-175.