Town vs. gown: A direct comparison of community residents and student mock jurors

Behavioral Sciences and the Law

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 452-466

  Hosch, Harmon M ^a   Culhane, Scott E ^b   Tubb, V Anne ^c   Granillo, Edgar A ^d  

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

^b UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING   (United States)

^c FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION   (United States)

^d AUSTIN COMMUNITY COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CRIMINAL LAW; DECISION MAKING; DEMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; STUDENT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CRIMINAL LAW; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREJUDICE; RESIDENCE CHARACTERISTICS; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; STUDENTS;

EID: 79960443687     PISSN: 07353936     EISSN: 10990798     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bsl.970     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Bornstein, B. H.(1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out?Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75-91. DOI:10.1023/A:1022326807441.
2. Bray, R. M., & Kerr, N. L.(1979). Use of simulation method in the study of jury behavior: Some methodological considerations. Law and Human Behavior, 3, 107-119. DOI:10.1007/BF01039151.
3. Bray, R. M., & Kerr, N. L.(1982). Methodological issues in the study of psychology of the courtroom. In N. L. Kerr, & R. M. Bray (Eds.), The psychology of the courtroom (pp.287-323). New York:Academic Press.
4. Breau, D. L., & Brook, B.(2007).'Mock' mock juries: A field experiment on the ecological validity of jury simulations. Law & Psychology Review, 31, 77-92. Accessed on June 1, 2010 from.
5. Burnam, M. A., Telles, C. A., Karno, M., Hough, R. L., & Escobar, J. I.(1987). Measurement of acculturation in a community population of Mexican-Americans. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 9, 105-130. DOI:10.1177/0739986.
6. Carlson, K. A., & Russo, J. E.(2001). Biased interpretation of evidence by mock jurors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 91-103. DOI:10.1037/1076-898X.7.2.91.
7. Constable, M.(1994). The law of the other: The mixed jury and changing conceptions of citizenship, law and knowledge. Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press, Inc.
8. Culhane, S. E., Hosch, H. M., & Weaver, W. G.(2004). Crime victims serving as jurors: Is there bias present?Law and Human Behavior, 28, 649-659. DOI:10.1007/s10979-004-0792-1.
9. Devine, D. J., Clayton, L. D., Dunford, B. B., Seying, R., & Pryce, J.(2001). Jury decision making: 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 622-727. DOI:10.1037/1076-8971.7.3.622.
10. Diamond, S. S.(1997). Illuminations and shadows from jury simulations. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 561-571. DOI:10.1023/A:1024831908377.
11. Diamond, S. S., Saks, M. J., & Landsman, S.(1998). Juror judgments about liability and damages: Sources of variability and ways to increase consistency. Pe Paul Law Review, 48, 301-326. Accessed on June 1, 2010 from.
12. Gasil, J., Black, L. W., Deess, E. P., & Leighter, J.(2008). From group member to democratic citizen: How deliberating with fellow jurors reshapes civic attitudes. Human Communication Research, 34, 127-169. DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00316.x.
13. Goodman, J., Loftus, E. F., & Greene, E.(1990). Matters of money: Voir dire in civil cases. Forensic Reports, 3, 303-329. Accessed on June 1, 2010 from.
14. Henry, P. J.(2008). College sophomores it the laboratory redux: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology's view of the nature of prejudice. Psychological Inquiry, 19, 49-71. DOI:10.1080/10478400802049936.
15. Hffman, M. B. (2003). The case for jury sentencing. Duke Law Journal, 52, 951-1010. Accessed on June 1, 2010 from.
16. Kardes, F. R.(1996). In defense of experimental consumer psychology. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 5, 279-296. DOI:10.1207/s15327663jcp0503-04.
17. Kerr, N. L., & Bray, R. M.(2005). Simulation, realism, and the study of the jury. In N. Brewer, & K. D. Williams (Eds.), Psychology and law: An empirical perspective (pp.322-364). New York, NY:Guilford Press.
18. Kerr, N. L., Nerenz, D., & Herrick, D.(1979). Role playing and the study of jury (behavior). Sociological Methods and Research, 7, 337-355. Accessed June1, 2010 from.
19. Levett, L. M., Danielsen, E. M., Kovera, M. B., & Cutler, B. L.(2005). The psychology of jury and juror decision making. In N. Brewer, & K. D. Williams (Eds.), Psychology and law: An empirical perspective (pp.365-406). New York, NY:Guilford Press.
20. Martín, M. E., de la Fuente, L., de la Fuente, E. I., & García, J.(2007). The influence of sample type, presentation format and strength of evidence on juror simulation research. Psychology, Crime & Law, 13, 139-153. DOI:10.1080/10683160500537431.
21. Narby, D. J., Cutler, B. L., & Moran, G.(1993).A meta-analysis of the association between authoritarianism and jurors' perceptions of defendant culpability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 34-42. DOI:10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.34.
22. Scott, E. S., & Steinberg, L.(2008). Rethinking juvenile justice. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
23. 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, 515-530. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.51.3.515.
24. Steinberg, L., Cauffman, E., Woolard, J., Graham, S., & Banich, M.(2009). Are adolescents less mature than adults?: Minors' access to abortion, the juvenile death penalty, and the alleged APA 'flip-flop.'American Psychologist, 64, 583-594. DOI:10.1037/a0014763.
25. Sue, S., Smith, R. E., & Gilbert, R.(1974). Biasing effects of pretrial publicity on judicial decisions. Journal of Criminal Justice, 2, 163-171. DOI:10.1016/0047-2352(74)90007-5.
26. rd Ed.) Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Texas Penal Code (1998). St. Paul, MN:West Publishing Co.
27. U.S. Census Bureau, (2009). 2006-2008American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, Retrieved from. and.
28. Vidmar, N.(2000).A historical and comparative perspective on the common law jury. In N. Vidmar (Ed.), World jury systems (pp.1-52). New York:Oxford University Press.
29. Warling, D., & Peterson-Badali, M.(2003). The verdict on jury trials for juveniles: The effects of defendant's age on trial outcomes. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 21, 63-82. DOI:10.1002/bsl.517.