The impact of Mock Jury gender composition on deliberations and conviction rates in a child sexual assault trial

Child Maltreatment

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 182-190

  Golding, Jonathan M ^a   Bradshaw, Gregory S ^a   Dunlap, Emily E ^a   Hodell, Emily C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

Author keywords

Child sexual assault; Child witnesses; Jury decision making

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CHILD; CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE; CRIMINAL LAW; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; LEGAL LIABILITY; MALE; PERCEPTION; ROLE PLAYING; SEX DIFFERENCE;

ADULT; CHILD; CHILD ABUSE, SEXUAL; CRIMINAL LAW; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; LIABILITY, LEGAL; MALE; ROLE PLAYING; SEX FACTORS; SOCIAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 34247363978     PISSN: 10775595     EISSN: 15526119     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1077559506298995     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Asch, S.E. (1955). Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American, 193, 31-35.
2. Bornstein, B.H. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75-91.
3. Bottoms, B.L., Golding, J.M., Stevenson, M.C., Wiley, T.R.A., Yozwiak, J.A. (in press). A review of factors affecting jurors' decisions in child sexual abuse cases. In J. D. Read, D. Ross, M. Toglia., R. Lindsay (Eds.), The psychology of eyewitness testimony. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4. Bottoms, B.L., Schmidt, E., Epstein, M. (1998). Effects of juror gender and verdict preference on persuasion during deliberations in child abuse trials. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the American PsychologyLaw Society, Redondo Beach, CA.
5. Cooper, W.S. (1999). Kentucky instruction to juries. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
6. Crowley, M.J., O'Callaghan, M., Ball, P.J. (1994). The juridical impact of psychological expert testimony in a simulated child sexual abuse trial. Law and Human Behavior, 18 (1). 89-105.
7. Diamond, S.S. (1997). Illuminations and shadows from jury simulations. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 561-571.
8. Dillehay, R.C., Nietzel, M.T. (1980). Constructing a science of jury behavior. In L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (pp. 246-264). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
9. Duggan, L.M., Aubrey, M., Doherty, E., Isquith, P.K., Levine, M., Scheiner, J. (1989). The credibility of children as witnesses in a simulated child sex abuse trial. In S. J. Ceci, D. F. Ross, M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Perspectives on the child witness (pp. 71-99). New York: Springer-Verlag.
10. Gabora, N.J., Spanos, N.P., Joab, A. (1993). The effects of complainant age and expert psychological testimony in a simulated child sexual abuse trial. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 103-119.
11. Golding, J.M., Sego, S.A., Polley, R.R., Hasemann, D. (1995). The believability of repressed memories. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 569-592.
12. Golding, J.M., Stewart, T.L., Yozwiak, J.A., Djadali, Y., Sanchez, R.P. (2000). The impact of DNA evidence in a child sexual assault trial. Child Maltreatment, 5, 373-383.
13. Goodman, G.S., Pyle-Taub, E., Jones, D.P.H., England, P., Port, L.P., Rudy, L., et al. (1992). Emotional effects of criminal court testimony on child sexual assault victims. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 57 (Serial No. 229 ).
14. Goodman, G.S., Quas, J.A., Bulkley, J., Shapiro, C. (1999). Innovations for child witnesses: A national survey. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5 (2). 255-281.
15. Hastie, R., Penrod, S.D., Pennington, N. (1981). Inside the jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
16. Isquith, P.K., Levine, M., Scheiner, J. (1993). Blaming the child: Attribution of responsibility to victims of child sexual abuse. In G. S. Goodman B. L. Bottoms (Eds.), Child victims, child witnesses: Understanding and improving memory (pp. 203-228). New York: Guilford.
17. Kalven, H., Zeisel, H. (1966). The American jury. Boston: Little, Brown.
18. Kentucky revised statutes. (2002). Eagan, MN: West Group (Section 510.110).
19. Kerr, N.L., Niedermeier, K.E., Kaplan, M.F. (1999). Bias in jurors vs. bias in juries: New evidence from the SDS perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Making, 80, 70-86.
20. Kovera, M.B., Gresham, A.W., Borgida, E., Gray, E., Regan, P.C. (1997). Does expert psychological testimony inform or influence juror decision making? A social cognitive analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 178-191.
21. Myers, J.E., Redlich, A., Goodman, G., Prizmich, L., Imwinkelried, E. (1999). Juror's perceptions of hearsay in child sexual abuse cases. Psychology, Public Policy, Law, 5 (2). 388-419.
22. Rose, M.R. (1999). The peremptory challenge accused of race or gender discrimination? Some data from One County. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 695-702.
23. Schklar, J., Diamond, S.S. (1999). Juror reactions to DNA evidence: Errors and expectancies. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 159-184.
24. Tanford, S., Penrod, S. (1986). Jury deliberations: Discussion content and influence processes in jury decision making. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 322-347.
25. Yozwiak, J.A., Golding, J.M., Marsil, D.F. (2004). The impact of type of out-of-court disclosure in a child sexual assault trial. Child Maltreatment, 9, 325-334.