Jury decision making research: Are researchers focusing on the mouse and not the elephant in the room?

Behavioral Sciences and the Law

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 439-451

  Nuñez, Narina ^a   McCrea, Sean M ^a   Culhane, Scott E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CRIMINAL LAW; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; RESEARCH; RESEARCH SUBJECT; REVIEW; STUDENT;

CRIMINAL LAW; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; RESEARCH; RESEARCH SUBJECTS; STUDENTS;

EID: 79960457530     PISSN: 07353936     EISSN: 10990798     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bsl.967     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Asch, S. E.(1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. In H. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership, and men (pp.177-190). Pittsburgh, PA:Carnegie Press.
2. 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.
3. Bornstein, B. H., Kaplan, D. L., & Perry, A. R.(2007). Child abuse in the eyes of the beholder: Lay perceptions of child sexual and physical abuse. Child Abuse and Neglect, 31, 375-391. DOI:10.1016/j.chiabu.2006.09.007.
4. Bottoms, B. L., Golding, J. M., Stevenson, M. C., Wiley, T. R. A., & Yozwiak, J. A.(2007).A review of factors affecting jurors' decisions in child sexual abuse cases. In M. P. Toglia, D. J. Read, D. F. Ross, & R. C. L. Lindsay (Eds.), The handbook of eyewitness psychology, Vol. 1: Memory for events (pp.509-543). Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.
5. Bourgeois, M., Nuñez, N., Perkins, J., & Frantz, J.(2002). Correlates of juror reasoning. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society meeting, Austin, TX.
6. 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.
7. Cutler, B. L., Dexter, H. R., & Penrod, S. D.(1989). Expert testimony and jury decision making: An empirical analysis. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 7, 215-225. DOI:10.1002/bsl.2370070206.
8. Davis, D. D., & Harless, D. W.(1996). Group versus individual performance in a price-searching experiment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 66, 215-227. DOI:10.1006/obhd.1996.0050.
9. Davis, J. H.(1973). Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes. Psychological Review, 80, 97-125. DOI:10.1037/h0033951.
10. Devine, D. J.(1999). Effects of cognitive ability, task knowledge, information sharing, and conflict on group decision making effectiveness. Small Group Research, 30, 608-634. DOI:10.1177/104649649903000506.
11. 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.
12. Devine, D. J., & Philips, J. L.(2001). Do smarter teams do better? A meta-analysis of cognitive ability and team performance. Small Group Research, 32, 507-532. DOI:10.1177/104649640103200501.
13. Diamond, S. S.(1997). Illuminations and shadows from jury simulations. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 561-571. DOI:10.1023/A:1024831908377.
14. Durso, F. T., Reardon, R., & Jolly, E. J.(1985). Self-nonself-segregation and reality monitoring. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 447-455. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.48.2.447.
15. Gastil, J., Burkhalter, S., & Black, L. W.(2007). Do juries deliberate? A study of deliberation, individual difference, and group member satisfaction at a municipal courthouse. Small Group Research, 38, 337-359. DOI:10.1177/1046496407301967.
16. Golding, J. M., Bradshaw, G. S., Dunlap, E. E., & Hodell, E. C.(2007). The impact of mock jury gender composition on deliberations and conviction rates in a child sexual assault trial. Child Maltreatment, 12, 182-190. DOI:10.1177/1077559506298995.
17. Henkel, L. A., Johnson, M. K., & De Leonardis, D. M.(1998). Aging and source monitoring: Cognitive processes and neuropsychological correlates. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 251-268. DOI:10.1037/0096-3445.127.3.251.
18. Horowitz, S. K., & Horowitz, I. B.(2007). The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic review of team demography. Journal of Management, 33, 987-1015. DOI:10.1177/0149206307308587.
19. Isenberg, D. J.(1986). Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 1141-1151. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.50.6.1141.
20. Janis, I. L.(1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes (2nd ed.). Boston, MA:Houghton Mifflin.
21. Johnson, M. K., & Raye, C. L.(1981). Reality monitoring. Psychological Review, 88, 67-85.
22. Kalven, H., Jr., & Zeisel, H.(1966). The American jury. Boston, MA:Little, Brown.
23. Kaplan, M. F.(1977). Discussion polarization effects in a modified jury decision paradigm: Informational influences. Social Psychology Quarterly, 40, 262-271. Retrieved 25 May 2010 from.
24. Kassin, S. M., Smith, V. L., & Tulloch, W. F.(1990). The dynamite charge: Effects on the perceptions and deliberation behavior of mock jurors. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 537-550. DOI:10.1007/BF01044880.
25. Kassin, S. M., & Sommers, S. R.(1997). Inadmissible testimony, instructions to disregard, and the jury: Substantive versus procedural considerations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10, 1046-1054. DOI:10.1177/01461672972310005.
26. Kerwin, J., & Shaffer, D. R.(1994). Mock jurors versus mock juries: The role of deliberations in reactions to inadmissible testimony. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 153-162. DOI:10.1177/0146167294202002.
27. Kuhn, D., Weinstock, M., & Flaton, R.(1994). How well do jurors reason? Competence dimensions of individual variation in a juror reasoning task. Psychological Science, 5( 5), 289-296. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00628.x.
28. Latané, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S.(1979). Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 822-832. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.37.6.822.
29. London, K. Y., & Nuñez, N.(2000). The effect of jury deliberation on jurors' propensity to disregard inadmissible evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 932-939. DOI:10.1037//0021-9010.85.6.932.
30. MacCoun, R. J., & Kerr, N. L.(1988). Asymmetric influence in mock jury deliberation: Jurors' bias for leniency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 21-33. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.54.1.21.
31. McCoy, M. L., Nuñez, N., & Dammeyer, M. D.(1999). The effect of jury deliberations on jurors' reasoning skills. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 557-575. DOI:10.1023/A:1022348229558.
32. Mills, C. J., & Bohannon, C. W.(1980). Juror characteristics: To what extent are they related to jury verdicts. Judicature, 64, 22-31. Retrieved 25 May 2010 from.
33. Mitchell, K. J., Johnson, M. K., & Mather, M.(2003). Source monitoring and suggestibility to misinformation: Adult age-related differences. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 107-119. DOI:10.1002/acp.857.
34. Nuñez, N., Bourgeois, M. J., Adams, C. S., & Binder, D. M. (2004, March). Effects of note taking and early discussion on evidentiary reasoning. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society meeting, Scottsdale, AZ.
35. Nuñez, N., Dahl, M. J., Tang, C. M., & Jensen, B.(2007). Trial venue and verdict decisions in juvenile cases: Mitigating and extralegal factors count. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 12, 21-39. DOI:10.1348/135532505X73768.
36. Nuñez, N., McCoy, M. L., Clark, H. L., & Shaw, L. A.(1999). The testimony of elderly victim/witnesses and their impact on juror decisions: The importance of examining multiple stereotypes. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 413-423. DOI:10.1023/A:1022308014652.
37. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R.(1986). Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 242-258. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.51.2.242.
38. Poole, D. A., & Lindsay, D. S.(1995). Interviewing preschoolers: Effects of nonsuggestive techniques, parental coaching, and leading questions on reports of nonexperienced events. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 60( 1), 125-154. DOI:10.1006/jecp.1995.1035.
39. Roberts, C. F., & Golding, S. L.(1991). The social construction of criminal responsibility and insanity. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 349-376. DOI:10.1007/BF02074076.
40. Ruva, C., & McEvoy, C.(2008). Negative and positive pretrial publicity affect juror memory and decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14, 226-305. DOI:10.1037/1076-898X.14.3.226.
41. Ruva, C., McEvoy, C., & Bryant, J. B.(2007). Effects of pre-trial publicity and jury deliberation on juror bias and source memory errors. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 45-67. DOI:10.1002/acp.1254.
42. Shaked-Schroer, N., Costanzo, M., & Marcus-Newhall, A.(2008). Reducing racial bias in the penalty phase of capital trials. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 26, 603-617. DOI:10.1002/bsl.829.
43. Sherif, M.(1935).A study of some social factors in perception. Archives of Psychology, 187, 1-60.
44. Sommers, S. R.(2006). On racial diversity and group decision making: Identifying multiple effects of racial composition on jury deliberations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 597-612. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.597.
45. Sorkin, R. D., Hays, C. J., & West, R.(2001). Signal-detection analysis of group decision making. Psychological Review, 108, 183-203. DOI: 30.1037//0033-295X. 108.1.183.
46. Stasser, G., & Titus, W.(1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467-1478. DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.48.6.1467.
47. Steblay, N., Hosch, H. M., Culhane, S. E., & McWethy, A.(2006). Instructions to disregard inadmissible evidence: A meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 469-492. DOI:10.1007/s10979-006-9039-7.
48. Steiner, I. D.(1972). Group process and productivity. New York:Academic.
49. Stroebe, W., & Kruglanski, A. W.(1989). Social psychology at epistemological crossroads: On Gergen's choice. European Journal of Social Psychology, 19, 485-489. DOI:10.1002/ejsp.2420190514.
50. Teger, A. I., & Pruitt, D. G.(1967). Components of group risk taking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 3, 189-205. DOI:10.1016/0022-1031(67)90022-4.
51. van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Homan, A. C.(2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1008-1022. DOI:10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1008.
52. Wiener, R. L., Gaborit, M., Pritchard, C. C., McDonough, E. M., Staebler, C. R., Wiley, D. C., & Goldkamp, K. S.(1994). Counterfactual thinking in mock juror assessments of negligence: A preliminary investigation. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 12, 89-102. DOI:10.1002/bsl.2370120108.
53. Wiener, R. L., Rogers, M., Winter, R., Hurt, L., Ackney, A., Kadela, K., Seib, H., Rauch, S., Warren, L., & Moasco, B.(2004). Guided jury discretion in capital murder cases: The role of declarative and procedural knowledge. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 10, 516-576. DOI:10.1037/1076-8971.10.4.516.