Strength of evidence, extraevidentiary influence, and the liberation hypothesis: Data from the field

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 136-148

  Devine, Dennis J ^a   Buddenbaum, Jennifer ^a   Houp, Stephanie ^a   Studebaker, Nathan ^a   Stolle, Dennis P ^b  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b ThemeVision LLC   (United States)

Author keywords

Extraevidentiary influence; Jury decision making; Jury verdicts; Liberation hypothesis; Strength of evidence

Indexed keywords

CRIME; DATA COLLECTION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 62349130530     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10979-008-9144-x     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. DC Baldus C Pulaski G Woodworth 1983 Comparative review of death sentences: An empirical study of the Georgia experience Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 74 661 753 10.2307/1143133
2. DC Baldus G Woodworth D Zuckerman NA Weiner B Brofitt 1998 Racial discrimination and the death penalty in the post-Furman era: An empirical and legal overview, with recent findings from Philadelphia Cornell Law Review 83 1638 1661
3. P Bliese 2000
4. WJ Bowers BD Steiner MR Sandys 2001 Death sentencing in Black and White: An empirical analysis of the role of jurors' race and jury racial composition University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law 3 171 274
5. MB Brewer 2007 The importance of being we: Human nature and intergroup relations The American Psychologist 62 728 738 10.1037/0003-066X.62.8.728
6. D Chadee 1996 Race, trial evidence and jury decision making Caribbean Journal of Criminology and Social Psychology 1 49 86
7. DJ Devine LD Clayton BD Dunford R Seying J Pryce 2001 Jury decision making: 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 7 622 727 10.1037/1076-8971.7.3.622
8. DJ Devine KM Olafson LL Jarivs JP Bott LD Clayton JMT Wolfe 2004 Explaining jury verdicts: Is leniency bias for real? Journal of Applied Social Psychology 34 2069 2098 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02691.x
9. Eagly, A., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. New York: Harcourt Brace.
10. T Eisenberg PL Hannaford-Agor VP Hans NL Waters GT Munsterman SJ Schwab 2005 Judge-jury agreement in criminal cases: A partial replication of Kalven and Zeisel's The American Jury Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 2 171 206 10.1111/j.1740-1461.2005.00035.x
11. E Greene SR Chopra MB Kovera SD Penrod VG Rose R Schuller 2002
12. PL Hannaford-Agor VP Hans 2003 Nullification at work? A glimpse from the National Center for State Courts study of hung juries Chicago-Kent Law Review 78 1249 1277
13. Hannaford-Agor, P. L., Hans, V. P., Mott, N. L., & Munsterman, G. T. (2002). Are hung juries a problem?. Williamsburg: VA: National Center for State Courts, National Institute of Justice.
14. M Heise 2004 Criminal case complexity: An empirical perspective Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 1 331 369 10.1111/j.1740-1461.2004.00010.x
15. L Heuer SD Penrod 1994 Trial complexity: A field investigation of its meaning and its effect Law and Human Behavior 18 29 52 10.1007/BF01499142
16. Kalven, H., & Zeisel, H. (1966). The American Jury. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
17. NL Kerr 1978 Severity of prescribed penalty and mock jurors' verdicts Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36 1431 1442 10.1037/0022-3514.36. 12.1431
18. NL Kerr RW Hymes AB Anderson JE Weathers 1995 Defendant-juror similarity and mock juror judgments Law and Human Behavior 19 545 567 10.1007/BF01499374
19. NL Kerr RJ MacCoun GP Kramer 1996 Bias in judgment: Comparing individuals and groups Psychological Review 103 687 719 10.1037/0033-295X.103.4.687
20. LM Levett EM Danielsen MB Kovera BL Cutler 2005
21. JM Marques 1990
22. R Mazzella A Feingold 1994 The effects of physical attractiveness, race, socioeconomic status, and gender of defendants and victims on judgments of mock jurors: A meta-analysis Journal of Applied Social Psychology 24 1315 1344 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb01552.x
23. TL Mitchell RM Haw JE Pfeifer CA Meissner 2005 Racial bias in mock juror decision-making: A meta-analytic review of defendant treatment Law and Human Behavior 29 621 637 10.1007/s10979-005-8122-9
24. Mize, G.E., Hannaford-Agor, P., & Waters, N.L.(2007). The state-of-the-states survey of jury improvement efforts: A compendium report. Retrieved January 16, 2008, from http://www.ncsconline.org/D-Research/cjs/pdf/ SOSCompendiumFinal.pdf.
25. MA Myers 1979 Rule departures and making law: Juries and their verdicts Law & Society Review 13 781 797 10.2307/3053186
26. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown.
27. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
28. BF Reskin CA Visher 1986 The impacts of evidence and extralegal factors in jurors' decisions Law & Society Review 20 423 438 10.2307/3053582
29. MJ Saks 1997 What do jury experiments tell us about how juries (should) make decisions? Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal 6 1 53
30. NM Steblay J Besirevic SM Fulero B Jimenez-Lorente 1999 The effects of pretrial publicity on juror verdicts: A meta-analytic review Law and Human Behavior 23 219 235 10.1023/A:1022325019080
31. LT Sweeney C Haney 1992 The influence of race on sentencing: A meta-analytic review of experimental studies Behavioral Sciences & the Law 10 179 195 10.1002/bsl.2370100204
32. TS Taylor HM Hosch 2004 An examination of jury verdicts for evidence of a similarity-leniency effect, an out-group punitiveness effect or a black sheep effect Law and Human Behavior 28 5 587 598 10.1023/B:LAHU.0000046436.36228.71
33. CA Visher 1987 Juror decision making Law and Human Behavior 11 1 17 10.1007/BF01044835
34. CM Werner MJ Strube AM Cole DK Kagehiro 1985 The impact of case characteristics and prior jury experience on jury verdicts Journal of Applied Social Psychology 15 409 427 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1985.tb02262.x