The role of death qualification in capital trials involving juvenile defendants

Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Volumn 37, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 549-560

  Butler, Brooke ^a  

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

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33847700818     PISSN: 00219029     EISSN: 15591816     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00174.x     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Baranoski, M. V. (2003). Commentary: Children's minds and adult statutes. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, 31, 321- 326.
2. Bersoff, D. N. (1987). In the Supreme Court of the United States: Lockhart v. McCree. American Psychologist, 42, 59-68.
3. Bottoms, B. L., Kovera, M. B., & McAuliff, B. D. (2002). Children, social science, and the law. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
4. Butler, B. (2007). The role of death qualification in jurors' susceptibility to pretrial publicity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 115-123.
5. 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.
6. Butler, B., & Moran, G. (in press). The impact of death qualification, belief in a just world, legal authoritarianism, and locus of control on venirepersons' evaluations of aggravating and mitigating circumstances in capital trials. Behavioral Sciences and the Law.
7. Butler, B., & Wasserman, A. W. (2006). The role of death qualification in venirepersons' attitudes toward the insanity defense. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 1744-1757.
8. Diamond, S. S. (1993). Instructing on death: Psychologist, juries, and judges. American Psychologist, 48, 423-434.
9. Dillehay, R. C., & Sandys, M. R. (1996). Life under Wainwright v. Witt: Juror dispositions and death qualification. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 147-165.
10. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
11. Fitzgerald, R., & Ellsworth, P. C. (1984). Due process vs. crime control: Death qualification and jury attitudes. Law and Human Behavior, 8, 31-51.
12. Forrester, A. (2002). Preventative detention, public protection, and mental health. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 13, 329-344.
13. Giedd, J. N., Blumenthal, J., & Jeffries, N. O. (1999). Brain development during childhood and adolescence: A longitudinal MRI study. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 861-863.
14. Grisso, T., & Schwartz, R. G. (2000). Youth on trial. Chicago: University of Chicago.
15. Haney, C. (1984a). Examining death qualification: Further analysis of the process effect. Law and Human Behavior, 8, 133-151.
16. Haney, C. (1984b). On the selection of capital juries: The biasing effects of death qualification. Law and Human Behavior, 8, 121-132.
17. Haney, C., Hurtado, A., & Vega, L. (1994). "Modern" death qualification: New data on its biasing effects. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 619-633.
18. 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.
19. Kravitz, D. A., Cutler, B. L., & Brock, P. (1993). Reliability and validity of the original and revised Legal Attitudes Questionnaire. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 661-677.
20. Lockhart v. McCree, 476 U.S. 162 (1986).
21. 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.
22. Lynch, M., & Haney, C. (2000). Discrimination and instructional comprehension: Guided discretion, racial bias, and the death penalty. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 337-358.
23. 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.
24. Narby, D. J., Cutler, B. L., & Moran, G. (1993). A meta-analysis of the association between authoritarianism and jurors' perceptions of defendant culpability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 34-42.
25. Ogloff, J. R. P. (1987). The juvenile death penalty: A frustrated society's attempt for control. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 5, 447-455.
26. Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002).
27. 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.
28. rd 397 (Supreme Ct. of Missouri, 2005).
29. Sanborn, J. B. (1994). Certification to criminal court: The important policy questions of how, when, and why. Crime and Delinquency, 40, 262-281.
30. Steinberg, L., & Scott, E. S. (2003). Less guilty by reason of adolescence: Developmental immaturity, diminished responsibility, and the juvenile death penalty. American Psychologist, 58, 1009-1018.
31. Streib, V. (2004, May). The juvenile death penalty today: Death sentences and executions of juvenile crimes, January 1, 2003-April 30, 2004. Retrieved July 17, 2004, from http://www.law.onu.edu/faculty/Streib/Juv DeathApr302004.pdf
32. 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.
33. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
34. Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 (1985).
35. Wiener, R. L., Pritchard, C. C., & Weston, M. (1995). Comprehensibility of approved jury instructions in capital murder cases. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 455-467.