How type of excuse defense, mock juror age, and defendant age affect mock jurors' decisions

Journal of Social Psychology

Volumn 147, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 371-392

  Higgins, Pamela L ^a   Heath, Wendy P ^a   Grannemann, Bruce D ^b  

^a RIDER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

Author keywords

Defendant age; Excuse defenses; Mock juror age; Psychology and law

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; CRIMINAL LAW; DECISION MAKING; EMPATHY; FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY; HUMAN;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; CRIMINAL LAW; DECISION MAKING; EMPATHY; HUMANS; INSANITY DEFENSE; JUDGMENT;

EID: 35448949123     PISSN: 00224545     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3200/SOCP.147.4.371-392     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Bergeron, C. E., & McKelvie, S. J. (2004). Effects of defendant age on severity of punishment for different crimes. The Journal of Social Psychology, 14, 75-90.
2. Blanchard-Fields, F. (1994). Age differences in causal attributions from an adult developmental perspective. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 49, 43-51.
3. Blanchard-Fields, F. (1996). Causal attributions across the adult life span: The influence of social schemas, life context, and domain specificity. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 137-146.
4. Blanchard-Fields, F. (1999). Social schematicity and causal attributions. In T. M. Hess & F. Blanchard-Fields (Eds.), Social cognition and aging (pp. 219-236). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
5. Blanchard-Fields, F., Chen, Y., Schocke, M., & Hertzog, C. (1998). Evidence for contentspecificity of causal attributions across the adult life span. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 5, 241-263.
6. Blumenthal, J. A. (1998). The reasonable woman standard: A meta-analytic review of gender differences in perceptions of sexual harassment. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 33-57.
7. Bornstein, B. H. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75-91.
8. Cavanaugh, J. C., & Blanchard-Fields, F. (2002). Adult development and aging (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
9. Chen, Y., & Blanchard-Fields, F. (1997). Age differences in stages of attributional processing. Psychology and Aging, 12, 694-703.
10. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Cooper, J., Bennett, E. A., & Sukel, H. L. (1996). Complex scientific testimony: How do jurors make decisions? Law and Human Behavior, 20, 379-394.
12. Costa, P., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (2002). Looking backward: Changes in the mean levels of personality traits from 80 to 12. In D. Cervone and W. Mischel (Eds.), Advances in personality science (pp. 219-237). New York: Guilford Press.
13. Crowley, M. J., O'Callaghan, M. G., & Ball, P. J. (1994). The juridical impact of psychological expert testimony in a simulated child sexual abuse trial. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 89-105.
14. Dane, F. C., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1982). Effects of defendants' and victims' characteristics on jurors' verdicts. In N. L. Kerr and R. M. Bray (Eds.), The psychology of the courtroom (pp. 83-115). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
15. Dershowitz, A. M. (1994). The abuse excuse. Boston: Little, Brown.
16. Devine, D. J., Clayton, L. D., Dunford, B. B., Seying, R., & Pryce, J. (2001). Jury decision making: 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 622-727.
17. Duberstein, P. R. (1995). Openness to experience and completed suicide across the second half of life. International Psychogeriatrics, 7, 183-198.
18. Feild, H. S., & Barnett, N. J. (1978). Simulated jury trials: Students vs. "real" people as jurors. The Journal of Social Psychology, 104, 287-293.
19. Fischer, G. J. (1997). Gender effects on individual verdicts and on mock jury verdicts in a simulated acquaintance rape trial. Sex Roles, 36, 491-501.
20. Fitzgerald, J. M. (2000). Younger and older jurors: The influence of environmental supports on memory performance and decision-making in complex trials. Journal of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 55, 323-331.
21. Foley, L. A., & Pigott, M. A. (1997). Race, age and jury decisions in a civil rape trial. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 15, 37-55.
22. Graham, S., Weiner, B., & Sahar Zucker, G. (1997). An attributional analysis of punishment goals and public reactions to O. J. Simpson. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 331-346.
23. Griffitt, W., & Jackson, T. (1973). Simulated jury decisions: The influence of jurydefendant attitude similarity-dissimilarity. Social Behavior and Personality, 1, 1-7.
24. Hans, V. P. (1992). Jury decision making. In D. K. Kagehiro & W. S. Laufer (Eds.), Handbook of psychology and law (pp. 56-76). New York: Springer-Verlag.
25. Hansen, M. (2002). Reaching out to jurors. ABA Journal, 88, 32-35.
26. Hastie, R., Penrod, S. D., & Pennington, N. (1983). Inside the jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
27. Heath, W. P., Grannemann, B. D., Peacock, M. A., & Dulyx, J. (2001). Effects of considering who and why the defendant attacked. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 860-887.
28. Heath, W. P., Stone, J., Darley, J. M., & Grannemann, B. D. (2003). Yes, I did it, but don't blame me: Perceptions of excuse defenses. Journal of Psychiatry and Law, 31, 187-226.
29. Hepburn, J. R. (1980). The objective reality of evidence and the utility of systematic jury selection. Law and Human Behavior, 4, 89-101.
30. Hummert, M. L., Garstka, T A., & Shaner, J. L. (1997). Stereotyping of older adults: The role of target facial cues and perceiver characteristics. Psychology and Aging, 12, 107-114.
31. Kerr, N. L. (1981). Effects of prior juror experience on juror behavior. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 2, 175-193.
32. Kerr, N. L., MacCoun, R. J., & Kramer, G. P. (1996). Bias in judgment: Comparing individuals and groups. Psychological Review, 103, 687-719.
33. Klein, R. L. (1972). Age, sex, and task difficulty as predictors of social conformity. Journal of Gerontology, 27, 229-236.
34. Kuhn, D., Weinstock, M., & Flaton, R. (1994). How well do jurors reason? Competence dimensions of individual variation in a juror reasoning task. Psychological Science, 5, 289-296.
35. Leeper, K. K., & Bruschke, J. (1995). The prevalence of the abuse excuse: Media hype or cause for concern? Communications and the Law, 17, 47-65.
36. Loeffler, R. L., & Lawson, T. J. (2002). Age and occupational status of defendant in relation to mock juror sentencing recommendations. Current Psychology, 21, 289-292.
37. McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T., Jr., de Lima, M. P., Simoes, A., Ostendorf, F., Angleitner, A., et al. (1999). Age differences in personality across the adult life span: Parallels in five cultures. Developmental Psychology, 35, 466-411.
38. Miller, M., & Hewitt, J. (1978). Conviction of a defendant as a function of juror-victim racial similarity. The Journal of Social Psychology, 105, 159-160.
39. Myers, D. G., & Kaplan, M. F. (1976). Group-induced polarization in simulated juries. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2, 63-66.
40. Nisbett, R. E., Caputo, C., Legant, P., & Marecek, J. (1973). Behavior as seen by the actor and as seen by the observer. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 154-164.
41. Nunez, N., McCoy, M. L., Clark, H. L., & Shaw, L. A. (1999). The testimony of elderly victim/witnesses and their impact on juror decisions: The importance of examining multiple stereotypes. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 413-423.
42. Prager, I. R. (1996). Age differences and conformity in juror decision making (Doctoral dissertation, Florida International University, 1995). Dissertation Abstracts International, 56, 7068.
43. Salthouse, T. A. (1996). The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition. Psychological Review, 103, 403-428.
44. Sealy, A. P. (1981). Another look at social psychological aspects of juror bias. Law and Human Behavior, 5, 187-200.
45. Smith, E. D., & Hed, A. (1979). Effects of offenders' age and attractiveness on sentencing by mock jurors. Psychological Reports, 44, 691-694.
46. Weiten, W., & Diamond, S. S. (1979). A critical review of the jury simulation paradigm. Law and Human Behavior, 3, 71-93.
47. Wong, D. S. (1989, July 18). Killer of boy given 18-20 year term. Boston Globe, p. 16.