Jury decision making: Implications for and from psychology

Current Directions in Psychological Science

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 63-67

  Bornstein, Brian H ^a   Greene, Edie ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

decision making; juries; public policy

Indexed keywords

EID: 79952089115     PISSN: 09637214     EISSN: 14678721     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0963721410397282     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bornstein, B.H., & Greene, E. (in press). Consulting on damage awards. In R.L. Wiener & B.H. Bornstein (Eds.), Handbook of trial consulting. New York, NY: Springer.
2. Bornstein, B.H., & Robicheaux, T.R. (2008). Crisis, what crisis? Perception and reality in civil justice. In B.H. Bornstein, R.L. Wiener, R.F. Schopp & S.L. Willborn (Eds.), Civil juries and civil justice: Psychological and legal perspectives. (pp. 1-19). New York, NY: Springer.
3. Carlson, K., & Russo, J. (2001). Biased interpretation of evidence by mock jurors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 91-103.
4. Devine, D.J., Buddenbaum, J., Houp, S., Stolle, D., & Studebaker, N. (2007). Deliberation quality: A preliminary examination in criminal juries. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 4, 273-303.
5. Devine, D.J., Buddenbaum, J., Houp, S., Studebaker, N., & Stolle, D. (2009). Strength of evidence, extraevidentiary influence, and the liberation hypothesis: Data from the field. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 136-148.
6. Eisenberg, T., Hannaford-Agor, P.L., Hans, V.P., Waters, N.L., Munsterman, G.T., Schwab, S.J., & Wells, M.T. (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.
7. Feigenson, N. (2010). Emotional influences on judgments of legal blame: How they happen, whether they should, and what to do about it. In B.H. Bornstein & R.L. Wiener (Eds.), Emotion and the law: Psychological perspectives (pp. 45-96). New York, NY: Springer.
8. Greene, E. (2009). Psychological issues in civil trials. In J.D. Lieberman & D.A. Krauss (Eds.), Jury Psychology: Social Aspects of Trial Processes. (Vol.1, pp. 183-205). Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
9. Greene, E., & Bornstein, B.H. (2000). Precious little guidance: Jury instructions on damage awards. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6, 743-768.
10. Greene, E., & Bornstein, B.H. (2003). Determining damages: The psychology of jury awards. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
11. Horowitz, I., & Bordens, K. (2000). The consolidation of plaintiffs: The effects of number of plaintiffs on jurors' liability decisions, damage awards, and cognitive processing of evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 909-918.
12. Lieberman, J., & Krauss, D. (2009). Jury psychology: Social aspects of the trial process. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
13. MacCoun, R. & Kerr, N. (1988). Asymmetric influence in mock jury deliberation: Jurors' bias for leniency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 21-33.
14. Miller, M.K., & Bornstein, B.H. (2006). The use of religion in death penalty sentencing trials. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 675-684.
15. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 189-206.
16. Salerno, J., & Diamond, S. (2010). The promise of a cognitive perspective on jury deliberation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 174-179.
17. Smith, V. (1991). Prototypes in the courtroom: Lay representation of legal concepts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 857-872.
18. Steblay, N., Hosch, H.M., Culhane, S.E., & McWethy, A. (2006). The impact on juror verdicts of judicial instruction to disregard inadmissible evidence: A meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 469-492.
19. Vidmar, N., & Diamond, S. (2001). Juries and expert evidence. Brooklyn Law Review, 66, 1121-1180.
20. Wistrich, A., Guthrie, C., & Rachlinski, J. (2005). Can judges ignore inadmissible information? The difficulty of deliberately disregarding. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 153, 1251-1345.