Can jurors recognize missing control groups, confounds, and experimenter bias in psychological science?

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 33, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 247-257

  McAuliff, Bradley D ^a   Kovera, Margaret Bull ^b   Nunez, Gabriel ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b JOHN JAY COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE   (United States)

Author keywords

Expert testimony; Internal validity; Juror decision making; Scientific reasoning

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COURT; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERNAL VALIDITY; JURISPRUDENCE; MALE; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT;

ADULT; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CALIFORNIA; COGNITION; CONFOUNDING FACTORS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); DECISION MAKING; EXPERT TESTIMONY; FEMALE; FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREJUDICE; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 67349272586     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10979-008-9133-0     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Brewer, M. B. (2000). Research design and issues of validity. In H. T. Reis, & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 3-16). New York: Cambridge University Press.
2. J. T. Cacioppo R. E. Petty 1982 The need for cognition Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 42 116 131
3. J. T. Cacioppo R. E. Petty J. A. Feinstein W. B. G. Jarvis 1996 Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in the need for cognition Psychological Bulletin 119 197 253 (Pubitemid 126042645)
4. S. Chaiken 1980 Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39 752 766
5. Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. (1989). Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In J. S. Uleman, & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 212-251). New York: Guilford Press.
6. S. Chaiken D. Maheswaran 1994 Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 66 460 473
7. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., 113 S.Ct. 2786 (1993).
9. D. L. Faigman A. J. Baglioni 1988 Bayes' theorem in the trial process: Instructing jurors on the value of statistical evidence Law and Human Behavior 12 1 17 (Pubitemid 18076097)
10. G. T. Fong D. H. Krantz R. E. Nisbett 1986 The effects of statistical training on thinking about everyday problems Cognitive Psychology 18 253 292
11. S. I. Gatowski S. A. Dobbin J. T. Richardson G. P. Ginsburg M. L. Merlino V. Dahir 2001 Asking the gatekeepers: A national survey of judges on judging expert evidence in a post-Daubert world Law and Human Behavior 25 433 458 (Pubitemid 33743581)
12. General Electric Co., et al., v. Joiner et ux., 522 U.S. 136 (1997).
13. J. Goodman 1992 Jurors' comprehension and assessment of probabilistic evidence American Journal of Trial Advocacy 16 361 389
14. J. L. Groscup S. D. Penrod C. A. Studebaker M. T. Huss K. M. O'Neil 2002 The effects of Daubert on the admissibility of expert testimony in state and federal criminal cases Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 8 339 372
15. R. Hamill T. D. Wilson R. E. Nisbett 1980 Insensitivity to sample bias: Generalizing from atypical cases Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39 578 589
16. Hastie, R., Penrod, S. D., & Pennington, N. (1983). Inside the jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17. D. Kahneman A. Tversky 1973 On the psychology of prediction Psychological Review 80 237 251
18. D. H. Kaye J. J. Koehler 1991 Can jurors understand probabilistic evidence? Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A 154 Pt 1 75 81
19. Kovera, M. B., Gresham, A. W., Borgida, E., Gray E., & Regan, P. C. (1997). Does expert testimony inform or influence juror decision-making? A social cognitive analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 178-191.
20. M. B. Kovera B. D. McAuliff 2000 The effects of peer review and evidence quality on judge evaluations of psychological science: Are judges effective gatekeepers? Journal of Applied Psychology 85 574 586
21. Kovera, M. B., & McAuliff, B. D. (2000b). Attorneys' evaluations of psychological science: Does evidence quality matter? Paper presented in M. Kovera & B. McAuliff (Co-Chairs), Judge, attorney, and juror decisions about scientific and statistical evidence. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, New Orleans, LA.
22. M. B. Kovera B. D. McAuliff K. S. Hebert 1999 Reasoning about scientific evidence: Effects of juror gender and evidence quality on juror decisions in a hostile work environment case Journal of Applied Psychology 84 362 375
23. M. B. Kovera M. B. Russano B. D. McAuliff 2002 Assessment of the commonsense psychology underlying Daubert: Legal decision makers' abilities to evaluate expert evidence in hostile work environment cases Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 8 180 200
24. Kumho Tire Co., Ltd., et al., v. Carmichael et al., 526 U.S. 137 (1999).
25. Levett, L. M., & Kovera, M. B. (2007). The effectiveness of opposing expert witnesses for educating jurors about unreliable expert evidence. Law and Human Behavior. http://www.springerlink.com . doi: 10.1007/s10979-007-9113-9 . Accessed 1 December 2007.
26. B. D. McAuliff M. B. Kovera 2008 Juror need for cognition and sensitivity to methodological flaws in expert evidence Journal of Applied Social Psychology 38 385 408
27. D. Mill T. Gray D. R. Mandel 1994 Influence of research methods and statistics courses on everyday reasoning, critical abilities, and belief in unsubstantiated phenomena Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 26 246 258 (Pubitemid 24799337)
28. K. E. Niedermeier N. L. Kerr L. A. Messé 1999 Jurors' use of naked statistical evidence: Exploring bases and implications of the Wells effect Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 76 533 542
29. R. E. Petty J. T. Cacioppo 1984 The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46 69 81
30. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123-203). New York: Academic Press.
31. R. E. Petty J. T. Cacioppo R. Goldman 1981 Personal involvement as a determinant of argument based persuasion Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 41 847 855
32. Ratneshwar, S., & Chaiken, S. (1991). Comprehension's role in persuasion: The case of its moderating effect on the persuasive impact of source cues. Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 52-62.
33. Robinson v. Jacksonville Shipyards Inc., 760 F.Supp. 1486 (M.D. Fla. 1991).
34. L. A. Rudman E. Borgida 1995 The afterglow of construct accessibility: The behavioral consequences of priming men to view women as sexual objects Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 31 493 517 (Pubitemid 126028844)
35. J. Schklar S. S. Diamond 1999 Juror reactions to DNA evidence: Errors and expectancies Law and Human Behavior 23 159 184 (Pubitemid 29215411)
36. B. C. Smith S. D. Penrod A. L. Otto R. C. Park 1996 Jurors' use of probabilistic evidence Law and Human Behavior 20 49 82 (Pubitemid 26044331)
37. W. C. Thompson E. L. Schumann 1987 Interpretation of statistical evidence in criminal trials: The prosecutor's fallacy and the defense attorney's fallacy Law and Human Behavior 11 167 187
38. A. Tversky D. Kahneman 1974 Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases Science 185 1124 1131
39. G. L. Wells 1992 Naked statistical evidence of liability: Is subjective probability enough? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 62 739 752