The effects of accomplice witnesses and jailhouse informants on jury decision making

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 32, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 137-149

  Neuschatz, Jeffrey S ^a   Lawson, Deah S ^a   Swanner, Jessica K ^a   Meissner, Christian A ^b   Neuschatz, Joseph S ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA IN HUNTSVILLE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT EL PASO   (United States)

^c ROGER WILLIAMS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Accomplice witnesses; Confessions; Jailhouse informants; Jury decision making

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMMUNITY; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; JURISPRUDENCE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MOTIVATION; PRISON; PRISONER; WITNESS;

ADULT; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; DECISION MAKING, ORGANIZATIONAL; DISCLOSURE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PRISONERS; PRISONS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 39749130231     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10979-007-9100-1     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Bloom, R. M. (2002). Ratting: The use and abuse of informants in the American justice system. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
2. Bornstein, B. H. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75-91.
3. Cassidy, R. M. (2004). Soft words of hope: "Giglio, accomplice witnesses, and the problem of implied inducements. North Western University Law Review, 98, 1-43.
4. Cutler, B. L., Dexter, H. R., & Penrod, S. D. (1990). Nonadversarial methods for sensitizing jurors to eyewitness evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20, 1197-1207.
5. Dill, W. R. (1964). Desegregation or Integration? Comments about Contemporary Research on Organizations. In W. W. Cooper et al. (Ed.), New perspectives in organization research (pp. 39-52). New York: Wiley.
6. Giglio v. United States, 405 US 150 (1972) 405 US 150.
7. Gilbert, D. T., & Malone, P. S. (1995). The correspondence bias. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 21-38.
8. Greene, E. (1988). Judge's instruction on eyewitness testimony: Evaluation and revision. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 252-276.
9. Kassin, S. M., & Gudjonsson G. (2005). The psychology of confession evidence: A review of the literature and issues. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5, 33-67.
10. Kassin, S. M., & McNall, K. (1991). Police interrogations & confessions: Communicating promises and threats by pragmatic implication. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 233-251.
11. Kassin, S. M., & Neumann, K. (1997). On the power of confession evidence: An experimental test of the "fundamental difference" hypothesis. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 469-484.
12. Kassin, S. M., & Sukel, H. (1997). Coerced confessions and the jury: An experimental test of the "harmless error" rule. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 27-46.
13. Kassin, S. M., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1980). Prior confessions and mock juror verdicts. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 10, 133-146.
14. Kassin, S. M., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1981). Coerced confessions, judicial instruction, and mock juror verdicts. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 11, 489-506.
15. Katzev, R. D., & Wishart, S. S. (1985). The impact of judicial commentary concerning eyewitness identifications on jury decision making. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 76, 733-745.
16. Mazur, E. P (2002). Rational expectations of leniency: Implicit plea agreements and the prosecutor's role as a minister of justice. Duke Law Journal, 51, 1333.
17. Oakes, W. (1972). External validity and the use of real people as subjects. American Psychologist, 27(October), 959-962.
18. Peterson, R. A. (2001). On the use of college students in social science research: Insights from a second-order meta-analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 450-461.
19. Rappold, S. (2005). Jailhouse informers: A risky bet. The Gazette Nov 20.
20. Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 174-221.
21. Schultz, D. P. (1969) The human subject in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 72(September), 214-228.
22. Sears, D. O. (1986). College sophomores in the laboratory: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology's view of human nature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(September), 515-530.
23. Simon, D., & Holyoak, K. J. (2002). Structural dynamics of cognition: From consistency theories to constraint satisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 283-294.
24. United States v. Singleton, 144 F.3d 1343 (10th Cir. 1998).
25. Weick, K. E. (1967). Organizations in the Laboratory. In V. H. Vroom (Ed.), Methods of organizational research (pp. 1-56). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.