The use of religion in death penalty sentencing trials

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 30, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 675-684

  Miller, Monica K ^a   Bornstein, Brian H ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

Author keywords

Attorney arguments; Capital punishment; Death penalty; Jury decision making; Religion

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COURT; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; LAWYER; LEGAL ASPECT; MALE; PUNISHMENT; RELIGION; WITNESS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTITUDE; BIBLE; CAPITAL PUNISHMENT; CHRISTIANITY; DECISION MAKING; EMOTIONS; FEMALE; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; JUDICIAL ROLE; LAW ENFORCEMENT; LAWYERS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MIDWESTERN UNITED STATES; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; PUNISHMENT; RELIGION AND PSYCHOLOGY;

EID: 33751503001     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10979-006-9056-6     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Bennett, M., & Dewberry, C. (1994). "I've said I'm sorry, haven't I?" A study of the identity implications and current restraints that apologies create for their recipients. Current Psychology, 13, 10-21.
2. Blume, J. H., & Johnson, S. L. (2000). Don't take his eye, don't take his tooth, and don't cast the first stone: Limiting religious arguments in capital cases. William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal, 9, 61-104.
3. Burritt, C. (July 30, 1995). Seeking meaning in Smith tragedy: Faith helps ease pain but "the mystery is why God allows certain things to happen." Atlanta Journal and Constitution, A 12.
4. CNN.com (2006, January 9). Yates: Not guilty by reason of insanity. Retrieved February 6, 2006 from http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/01/09/andrea.yeates. ap/index.html
5. CNN.com (2004, June 15). Juror: Sympathy spared Nichols. Retrieved February 6, 2006 from http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/06/12/nichols.react/index.html
6. Cook, A., Arndt, J., & Lieberman, J. D. (2004). Firing back at the Backfire Effect: The influence of mortality salience and nullification beliefs on reactions to inadmissible evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 389-410.
7. Cooper, J., & Neuhaus, I. (2000). The "hired gun" effect: Assessing the effect of pay, frequency of testifying, and credentials on the perception of expert testimony. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 149-171.
8. Duffy, B. C. (1997). Prosecutors' use of religious arguments in the sentencing phase of capital cases. Vanderbilt Law Review, 50, 1335-1385.
9. Eagly, A. E., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The Psychology of Attitudes. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
10. Epstein, S. (1990). Cognitive-Experiental Self-Theory. Handbook of Personality: Theory & Research, NY: Guilford Press.
11. Epstein, S. (1994). Integration of the Cognitive and the Psychodynamic Unconscious. American Psychologist, 49, 709-724.
12. Haney, C. (2004). Condemning the other in death penalty trials: Biographical racism, structural mitigation, and the empathic divide. DePaul Law Review, 53, 1557-1590.
13. Harris, K., Davies, B. J., & Baron, S. (1997). Conversations during purchase consideration: Sales assistants and customers. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 7, 173-190.
14. Henson, M. (2001). Carruthers v. State: Thou shalt not make direct religious references in closing arguments. Mercer Law Review, 52, 731-744.
15. Huntley, J. E., & Costanzo, M. (2003). Sexual harassment stories: Testing a story-mediated model of juror decision-making in civil litigation. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 29-51.
16. Ivkovic, S., & Hans, V. (2003). Jurors' evaluations of expert testimony: Judging the messenger and the message. Law and Social Inquiry, 28, 441-482.
17. Johnson, S. D. (1985). Religion as a defense in a mock-jury trial. Journal of Social Psychology, 125, 213-220.
18. Loewy, A. H. (2000). Religious neutrality and the death penalty. William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal, 9, 191-200.
19. Miller, M. K., & Bornstein, B. H. (2005). Religious appeals in closing arguments: Impermissible input or benign banter? Law and Psychology Review, 29, 29-61.
20. Morganthau, T. (1995, August 7). Smith condemned to life, Newsweek, 19.
21. Pearce, R. G. (1999). Law Day 2050: Post-Professionalism, Moral Leadership, and the Law as Business Paradigm. Florida State University Law Review, 27, 9-23.
22. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1984). The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 69-81.
23. Simons, M. A. (2004). Born again on death row: Retribution, remorse and religion. Catholic Lawyer, 43, 311-337.
24. Simson, G. J., & Garvey, S. P. (2001). Knockin' on heaven's door: Rethinking the role of religion in death penalty cases. Cornell Law Review, 86, 1090-1130.
25. Stasson, M. F., & Davis, J. H. (1989). The relative effects of the number of arguments, number of argument sources and number of opinion positions in group-mediated opinion change. British Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 251-262.
26. Takaku, S., Weiner, B., & Ohbuchi, T. (2001). A cross-cultural examination of the effects of apology and perspective taking on forgiveness. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 21, 144-166.
27. Voss, J. (2005). The Science of Persuasion: An Exploration of Advocacy and the Science Behind the Art of Persuasion in the Courtroom. Law & Psychology Review, 29, 301-327.