The effect of the deliberation process and jurors' prior legal knowledge on the sentence: The role of psychological expertise and crime scene photo

Behavioral Sciences and the Law

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 426-441

  Bastounis, Marina ^a,b   Finkelstein, Remi ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PARIS OUEST NANTERRE LA DÉFENSE   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGGRESSION; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CRIMINAL LAW; DECISION MAKING; EDUCATION; EXPERT WITNESS; FEMALE; HOMICIDE; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; MALE; MENTAL DISEASE; PERSONALITY TEST; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; PHOTOGRAPHY; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PUNISHMENT; SOCIOLOGY; VIOLENCE; WECHSLER INTELLIGENCE SCALE;

AGGRESSION; CRIMINAL LAW; DECISION MAKING; EXPERT TESTIMONY; FEMALE; HOMICIDE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; MENTAL DISORDERS; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; PHOTOGRAPHY; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PUNISHMENT; RORSCHACH TEST; SOCIAL SCIENCES; VIOLENCE; WECHSLER SCALES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77955695649     PISSN: 07353936     EISSN: 10990798     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bsl.914     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Alphen, E. (2002). Sept ans de solitude. Paris: Denoel.
2. Aubenas, F. (2005). La méprise. L'affaire d'Outreau. Paris: Seuil.
3. Bordel, S., Guingouin, G., & Somat, A. (2006). Objective and subjective responsibility in a judicial context. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 65(4), 227-235.
4. Bordel, S., Verdier, C., Dumas, R., Guingouin, G., & Somat, A. (2004). L'expertise psychologique, element de preuve du jugement judiciaire? [Psychological expertise, element of proof of legal judgement?]. Psychologie Francaise, 49, 389-408.
5. Bornstein, B. H., Miller, M. M., Nemeth, R. J., Page, G. L., & Musil, S. (2005). Jurors' reaction to jury duty: Perception of the system and potential stressors. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 23, 321-346.
6. Bornstein, B. H., & Nemeth, R. J. (1999). Jurors' perception of violence: A framework for inquiry. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 4, 77-92.
7. Bouloc, B., Stefani, G., & Levasseur, G. (2006). Procédure pénale (20ème edition). Paris: Dalloz-Sirey. Brekke, N., & Borgida, E. (1988). Expert psychological testimony in rape trials: A social cognitive analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(3), 372-386.
8. Charest, C., & Alain, M. (1995). Le psychologue a la cour: son rôle et son influence [Psychology in the court, role and influence]. Psychologie Française, 40, 303-310.
9. Cornish, W. R. (1968). The jury. London: Penguin.
10. Darley, J. M., & Gross, H. (1983). A hypotheis-confirming bias in labelling affects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 20-33.
11. De La Fuente, L., De La Fuente, E. I., & Garcia, J. (2003). Effects of pretrial juror bias, strength of evidence and deliberation process on juror decisions: New validity evidence of the Juror Bias Scale scores. Psychology, Crime and Law, 9(2), 197-209.
12. Devine, D. J., Clayton, L. D., Dunford, B. B., Seying, R., & Pryce, J. (2001). Jury decision making: 25 years of empirical research on deliberating groups. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 7, 622-727.
13. Duflot, C. (1999). L'expertise psychologique: procédure et methode [Psychological expertise: procedure and method]. Paris: Dunod.
14. Fabrigar, L. R., Petty, R. E., Smith, S. M., & Crites, S. L. (2006). Understanding knowledge effects on attitude-behavior consistency: The role of relevance, complexity and amount of knowledge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 556-577.
15. Feldmann, T. B., & Bell, R. A. (1993). Juror stress: identification and intervention. Bulletin of American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 21, 409-417.
16. Fishfader, V. I., Howells, G. N., Katz, R. C., & Teresi, P. S. (1996). Evidential and extra legal factors in juror decisions: Presentation mode, retention and level of emotionality. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 565-572.
17. Frank, J. (1949). Court on trial. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
18. Gabora, N. J., Spanos, N. P., & Joab, A. (1993). The effects of complainants age and expert psychological testimony in a simulated child sexual abuse trial. Law and Human Behavior, 17(1), 103-119.
19. Harley, E. M. (2007). Hindsight bias in legal decision making. Social Cognition, 25(1), 48-63.
20. Kaplan, M. F., & Martin, A. M. (1999). Effects of differential status of group members on process and outcome of deliberation. Group Processes and Intergroup Relation, 2(4), 347-364.
21. Keller, P. A., & Block, L. G. (1996). Increasing the persuasiveness offear appeals: The effect of arousal and elaboration. Journal ofConsumer Research, 22, 448-459.
22. Kelley, J. E. (1994). Addressing juror stress: A trial judge's perspective. Drake Law Review, 43, 97-125.
23. Kerr, N. L., Niedermeier, K. E., & Kaplan, M. F. (1999). Bias in jurors vs. bias in juries: New evidence from the SDS perspective. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 80(1), 70-86.
24. Kovera, M. B., Gresham, A. W., Borgida, E., Gray, E., & Regan, P. C. (1997). Does expert psychological testimony inform or influence jurors' decision making? A social cognitive analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1), 178-191.
25. Krauss, D. A., Lieberman, J. D., & Olson, J. (2004). The effects of rational and experiential information processing of expert testimony in death sentence cases. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 22, 801-822.
26. Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2006). Instruction manualandaffective ratings. Technical Report A-6, The Center for Research in Psychophysiology, University of Florida.
27. Martin, A. M., Kaplan, M. F., & Alamo, J. M. (2003). Discussion content and perception of deliberation in Western European versus American juries. Psychology, Crime and the Law, 9(3), 247-264.
28. Mazé, C., Finkelstein, R., & Quentin, M. (2004). Un jury sous influence: Le role des affects et du type d'expertise sur le verdict et la sentence des jurés. Psychologie Française, 49, 357-372.
29. Merle, R., & Vitu, A. (1967). Le jury. Traite de droit criminel [The jury: Treatise on criminal law] (pp. 1033-1036). Paris: Cujas.
30. Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgements. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
31. Palmer, A. (1988). Eljuradoy la psicologia social [The jury and social psychology]. Barcelona: PPU.
32. Petty, R. E., & Krosnick, J. A. (1995). Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
33. Pritchard, M. E., & Keenan, J. M. (2002). Does jury deliberation really improve jurors' memory? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 589-601.
34. Smith, S. M., & Shaffer, D. R. (2000). Vividness can undermine or enhance message processing: The moderating role of vividness congruency. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 769-779.
35. Stefani, G., Levasseur, G., & Bouloc, B. (1980). Procédure penale [Penal procedure] (11th ed.). Paris: Dalloz. Vidmar N. (Ed.), (2005). World Jury Systems. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.