The effect of acknowledging mock jurors' feelings on affective and cognitive biases: It depends on the sample

Behavioral Sciences and the Law

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 331-357

  McCabe, John G ^a   Krauss, Daniel A ^b  

^a CLAREMONT GRADUATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CLAREMONT MCKENNA COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CRIMINAL LAW; DECISION MAKING; EMOTION; EXPERT WITNESS; HUMAN; LEGAL ASPECT; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; SEXUAL CRIME; STUDENT;

CRIMINAL LAW; DECISION MAKING; EMOTIONS; EXPERT TESTIMONY; HUMANS; SEX OFFENSES; STUDENTS;

EID: 79960460001     PISSN: 07353936     EISSN: 10990798     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bsl.990     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Berkowitz, L., & Troccoli, B. T. (1990). Feelings, direction of attention, and expressed evaluations of others. Cognition and Emotion, 4, 305-325.
2. Bodenhausen, G. V., Kramer, G. P., & Süsser, K. (1994). Happiness and stereotypic thinking in social judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 621-632.
3. Bornstein, B. H. (1998). From compassion to compensation: The effect of injury severity on mock jurors' liability judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1477-1502.
4. Bornstein, B. H. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75-91.
5. Bornstein, B. H. (2004). The impact of different types of expert scientific testimony on mock jurors' liability verdicts. Psychology, Crime & Law, 10, 429-446.
6. Bornstein, B. H., & McCabe, S. G. (2004). Jurors of the absurd? The role of consequentiality in jury simulation research. Florida State University Law Review, 32, 443-467.
7. Bornstein, B. H., & Wiener, R. L. (Eds.) (2006). Emotion in legal judgment and decision making [Special issue]. Law and Human Behavior, 30.
8. Bottoms, B. L., & Goodman, G. S. (1994). Perceptions of children's credibility in sexual assault cases. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 702-732.
9. Bray, R. M., & Kerr, N. L (1979). Use of the simulation method in the study of jury behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 702-732.
10. Bray, R. M., & Kerr, N. L (Eds.) (1982). The psychology of the courtroom. New York: Academic Press.
11. Brekke, N., & Borgida, E. (1988). Expert psychological testimony in rape trials: A social-cognitive analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 372-386.
12. Bright, D.A., & Goodman-Delahunty, J. (2006). Gruesome evidence and emotion: Anger, blame, and jury decision-making. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 183-202.
13. Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 349-361.
14. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197-253.
15. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306-307.
16. Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (Eds.) (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford Press.
17. Clore, G. L., Gasper, K., & Garvin, E. (2001). Affect as information. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.) Handbook of affect and social cognition (pp. 121-144). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Dawes, R. M., Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (1989). Clincal versus actuarial judgment. Science, 243, 1668-1674.
19. DeSteno, D., Petty, R. E., Wegener, D. T., & Rucker, D. D. (2000). Beyond valence in the perception of likelihood: The role of emotion specificity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 397-416.
20. Diamond, S. S. (1997). Illuminations and shadows from jury simulations. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 561-571.
21. Douglas, K. S., Lyon, D. R., & Ogloff, R. P. (1997). The impact of graphic photographic evidence on mock jurors' decisions in a murder trial: Probative or Prejudicial? Law and Human Behavior, 21, 485-501.
22. Epstein, S. (1994). Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. The American Psychologist, 49, 709-724.
23. Epstein, S. (2003). Cognitive-experiential self-theory of personality. In T. Millon, & M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of Psychology. Vol. 5, Personality and social psychology. Retrieved November 13, 2006 from Claremont University, permalink for this record:.
24. Feigenson, N. (2003). Emotions, risk perceptions and blaming in 9/11 cases. Brooklyn Law Review, 68, 959-1001.
25. Feigenson, N., Park, J., & Salovey, P. (2001). The role of emotions in comparative negligence judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 576-603.
26. Gardner, W., Lidz, C., Mulvey, E., & Shaw, E. (1996). Clinical versus actuarial predictions of violence in patients with mental illness. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 602-609.
27. Grove, W., & Meehl, P. (1996). Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical-statistical controversy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2, 293-323.
28. Guy, L., & Edens, J. (2003). Juror decision-making in a mock sexually violent predator trial: Gender differences in the impact of divergent types of expert testimony. Behavioral Science and the Law, 21, 215-237.
29. Guy, L., & Edens, J. (2006). Gender differences in attitudes towards psychopathic sexual offenders. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 23, 603-625.
30. Hanson, R. (1997). The development of a brief actuarial scale for sexual offense recidivism. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Department of Solicitor General.
31. Hanson, R., & Morton-Bourgon, K. (2009). The accuracy of recidivism risk assessments for sex offenders: A meta-analysis of 118 predictive studies. Psychological Assessment, 21, 1-21.
32. Harris, G., Rice, M., & Cormier, C. (2002). Prospective replication of the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide in predicting violent recidivism among forensic patients. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 377-394.
33. Hastie, R. (2001). Emotions in jurors' decisions. Brooklyn Law Review, 66, 991-1009.
34. Kohut, H. (1971). The analysis of the self. New York: International University Press.
35. Kovera, M., McAuliff, B., & Herbert, K. (1999). Reasoning about scientific evidence: Effects of juror gender and evidence quality on juror decisions in a hostile work environment case. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 362-375.
36. Kramer, G. P., Kerr, N. L., & Carroll, J. S. (1990). Pretrial publicity, judicial remedies, and juror bias. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 409-438.
37. Krauss, D., & Lee, D. (2003). Deliberating on dangerousness and death: Jurors' ability to differentiate between expert actuarial and clinical predictions of dangerousness. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26, 113-137.
38. Krauss, D., Lieberman, J. D., & Olson, J. (2004). The effects of rational and experiential information processing of expert testimony in death penalty cases. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 6, 801-822.
39. Krauss, D. A., McCabe, J. G., & McFadden, S. (2009). Limited expertise and experts: Problems with the continued use of future dangerousness in capital sentencing. In R. Schopp, R. Wiener, B. Bornstein, & S. Wilborn (Eds.), Mental Disorder and Criminal Law: Responsibility, Punishment, and Competency (pp. 135-158). NY: Springer.
40. Krauss, D., & Sales, B. (2001). The effects of clinical and scientific expert testimony on juror decision-making in capital sentencing. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 267-310.
41. LaFond, J. Q. (2005). Preventing sexual violence: How Society should cope with sex offenders. Washington, D.C.: APA Press.
42. Lerner, J. S., Goldberg, J. H., & Tetlock, P. E. (1998). Sober second thought: The effects of accountability, anger, and authoritarianism on attribution of responsibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 563-574.
43. Levenson, J. S., Brannon, Y. N., Fortney, T., & Baker, J. (2007). Public perceptions about sex offenders and community protection policies. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policies, 7, 137-161.
44. Lieberman, J., Krauss, D., Kyger, M., & Lehoux, M. (2007). Determining dangerousness in Sexually Violent Predator evaluations: Cognitive-experiential self-theory and juror judgments of expert testimony. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 25, 507-526.
45. McCabe, J. G., Krauss, D. A., & Lieberman, J. D. (2010). Reality check: A comparison of college students and community sample of mock jurors in a simulated sexual violent predator civil commitment. Behavioral Science and the Law, 28, 730-750.
46. Mellers, B. A. (2000). Choice and the relative pleasure of consequences. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 910-924.
47. Miller, H. A., Amenta, A. E., & Conroy, M. A. (2005) Sexually violent predators evaluations: Empirical evidence, strategies for professionals, and research directions. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 29-54.
48. Mossman, D. (1994). Assessing predictions of violence: Being accurate about accuracy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 783-792.
49. Pacini, R., & Epstein, S. (1999). The relation of rational and experiential processing styles to personality, basic beliefs, and the ratio-bias problem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 972-987.
50. Quinsey, V., Harris, G., Rice, M., & Cormier, C. (1998). Violent offenders: Appraising and managing risk. American Psychological Association: Washington, DC.
51. Schutte, J., & Hosch, H. (1997). Gender differences in sexual assault verdicts: A meta-analysis. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 12, 759-772.
52. Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1983). Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: The informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 513-523.
53. Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (2003). Mood as information: 20years later. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 296-303.
54. 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.
55. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty. Science, 185, 1124-1131.
56. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1982). Judgments of and by representativeness. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 84-100). New York: Cambridge University Press.
57. Washington State Institute for Public Policy. (2007). Comparison of state laws authorizing involuntary commitment of sexually violent predators: 2006 update, revised. Retrieved July, 5, 2008 from.
58. Weiten, W., & Diamond, S. S. (1979). A critical review of the jury simulation paradigm: The case of defendant characteristics. Law and Human Behavior, 3, 71-93.