The psychology of the jury instruction process

Jury Psychology: Social Aspects of Trial Processes

Volumn 1, Issue , 2009, Pages 129-155

  Lieberman, Joel D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84255203746     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (106)

1. Abbott, W.F., Hall, F., and Linville, E. (1993). Jury Research: A Review and Bibliography. Philadelphia, PA: American Law Institute-American Bar Association.
2. American Bar Association (1990). Jury Comprehension in Complex Cases. Chicago, IL: American Bar Association.
3. Benson, R.W. (1985). The end of legalese: The game is over. Review of Law and Social Change, 13, 519-73.
4. Blanck, P.D., Rosenthal, D., and Cordell, L.D. (1985). The appearance of justice: Judges' verbal and nonverbal behavior in criminal jury trials. Stanford Law Review, 38, 89-164.
5. Bordens, K.S., and Horowitz, I.A. (1983). Information processing in joined and severed trials. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 13, 351-70.
6. Bordens, K.S., and Horowitz, I.A. (1985). Joinder of criminal offenses: A review of legal and psycholegal literature. Law and Human Behavior, 9, 339-53.
7. Bordens, K.S., and Horowitz, I.A. (1986). Prejudicial joinder of multiple offenses: Relative effects of cognitive processing and criminal schema. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 7, 243-58.
8. Bouck, J.C. (1993). Criminal jury trials: Pattern instructions and rules of procedure. Canadian Bar Review, 72, 129-61.
9. Brewer, N., Harvey, S., and Semmler, C. (2004). Improving comprehension of jury instructions with audio-visual presentation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 80, 58-67.
10. Broeder (1959). The University of Chicago jury project. Nebraska Law Review, 38, 744-55.
11. Buchanan, R.W., Pryor, B., Taylor, K.P., and Strawn, D.U. (1978). Legal communication: An investigation of juror comprehension of pattern instructions. Communication Quarterly, 26, 31-5.
12. Cameron, N., Potter, S., and Young, W. (1999). The New Zealand Jury. Law and Contemporary Problems, 62, 103-39.
13. Cecil, J.S., Hans, V.P., and Wiggins, E.C. (1991). Citizen comprehension of difficult issues: Lessons from civil jury trials. The American University Law Review, 40, 727-74.
14. Cecil, J.S., Lind, E.A., and Bermant, G. (1987). Jury Service in Lengthy Civil Trials. Washington, DC: Federal Justice Center.
15. Charrow, R.P., and Charrow, V. (1979). Making legal language understandable: A psycholinguistic study of jury instructions. Columbia Law Review, 79, 1306-1374.
16. Cox, M., and Tanford, S. (1989). Effects of evidence and instructions in civil trials: An experimental investigation of rules of admissibility. Social Behaviour, 4, 31-55.
17. Cruse, D., and Browne, B.A. (1987). Reasoning in a jury trial: The influence of instructions. The Journal of General Psychology, 114, 129-33.
18. Cutler, B.L., and Hughes, D.M. (2001). Judging jury service: Results of the North Carolina administrative office of the courts juror survey. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 19, 305-20.
19. Dane, F.C. (1985). In search of reasonable doubt: A systematic examination of selected quantification approaches. Law and Human Behavior, 9, 141-58.
20. Dann, B.M. (1993). Learning lessons and speaking rights: Creating educated and democratic juries. Indiana Law Journal, 68, 1229-79.
21. Dattu, F. (1998). Illustrated jury instructions. A proposal. Law and Psychology Review, 22, 67-102.
22. Diamond, H. (1990). Reasonable doubt: To define or not to define. Columbia Law Review, 90, 1716-36.
23. Diamond, S.S., and Levi, J.N. (1996). Improving decisions on death by revising and testing jury instructions. Judicature, 79, 224-32.
24. Eames, J. (2003). Towards a better direction: Better communication with jurors. Australian Bar Review, 24, 35-78.
25. Ellsworth, P.C. (1989). Are twelve heads better than one? Law and Contemporary Problems, 52, 205-24.
26. Ellsworth, P.C., and Reifman, A. (2000). Juror comprehension and public policy: Perceived problems and proposed solutions. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6, 788-821.
27. Elwork, A., Alfini, J.J., and Sales, B.D. (1982). Toward understandable jury instructions. Judicature, 65, 432-443.
28. Elwork, A., and Sales, B.D. (1985). Jury instructions. In S.M. Kassin and L.S. Wrightsman (eds), The Psychology of Evidence and Trial Procedure. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
29. Elwork, A., Sales, B.D., and Alfini, J.J. (1977). Juridic decisions: In ignorance of the law or in light of it. Law and Human Behavior, 1, 163-89.
30. Elwork, A., Sales, B.D., and Alfini, J.J. (1982). Making Jury Instructions Understandable. Charlottesville, VA: Michie.
31. Ferguson, G.A., and Bouck, J.C. (1987). Canadian Criminal Jury Instructions. Vancouver: Law Society of British Columbia.
32. Finkel, N.J. (1995). Commonsense Justice: Jurors' Notions of the Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33. Finkel, N.J. (2000). Commonsense justice and jury instructions: Instructive and reciprocating connections. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6, 591-28.
34. Finkel, N.J., and Groscup, J.L. (1997). Crime prototypes, objective versus subjective culpability, and a commonsense balance. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 209-230.
35. Finkel, N.J., and Handel, S.F. (1988). Jurors and insanity: Do test instructions instruct? Forensic Reports, 1, 65-79.
36. ForsterLee, L., Horowitz, I.A., and Bourgeois, M. (1993). Juror competence in civil trials: Effects of preinstruction and evidence technicality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 1421.
37. Forston, R.F. (1970). Judge's instructions: A quantitative analysis of jurors' listening comprehension. Today's Speech, 18, 34-8.
38. Forston R.F. (1975). Sense and non-sense: Jury trial communication. Brigham Young University Law Review, 601-37.
39. Frank, J., and Applegate, B.K. (1998). Assessing juror understanding of capitalsentencing instructions. Crime and Delinquency, 33, 412-33.
40. Greene, E. (1988). Judge's instruction on eyewitness testimony: Evaluation and revision. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 252-76.
41. Greene, E., and Bornstein, B. (2000). Precious little guidance: Jury instruction on damage awards. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6, 743-68.
42. Greene, E., and Johns, M. (2001). Jurors' use of instructions on negligence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 840-59.
43. Greene, E., and Loftus, E.F. (1985). When crimes are joined at trial. Law and Human Behavior, 9, 193-207.
44. Halverson, A.M., Hallahan, M., Hart, A.J., and Rosenthal, R. (1997). Reducing the biasing effects of judges' nonverbal behavior with simplified jury instruction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 590-598.
45. Haney, C., and Lynch, M. (1994). Comprehending life and death matters. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 411-36.
46. Hastie, R., Schkade, D., and Payne, J. (1998). A study of juror and jury judgments in civil cases: Deciding liability for punitive damages. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 287-314.
47. Heuer, L., and Penrod, S.D. (1989). Instructing jurors: A field experiment with written and preliminary instructions. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 409-30.
48. Heuer, L., and Penrod, S. (1994). Trial complexity: A field investigation of its meaning and its effects. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 29-51.
49. Hope, L., and Memon, A. (2006). Cross-border diversity: trial by jury in England and Scotland. In M.F. Kaplan and A.M. Martin (eds), Understanding World Jury Systems through Social Psychological Research. New York: Psychology Press.
50. Horowitz, I.A., Bordens, K.S., and Feldman, M.S. (1980). A comparison of verdicts obtained in severed and joined criminal trials. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 10, 444-56.
51. Horowitz, I.A., and Willging, T.E. (1991). Changing views of jury power: The nullification debate, 1787-1988. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 165-82.
52. Jackson, J. (1992). Juror decision-making and the trial process. In G. Davis and S. Lloyd-Bostock (eds), Psychology, Law, and Criminal Justice: International Developments in Research and Practice. Oxford: de Guyter. pp. 327-36.
53. Jones, C.S., and Myers, E. (1979). Comprehension of jury instructions in a simulated Canadian court. In Law Reform Commission of Canada (eds), Studies on the Jury. Ottawa: Law Reform Commission of Canada. pp. 301-92.
54. Kadish, M.R., and Kadish, S.H. (1971). The institutionalization of conflict: Jury acquittals. Journal of Social Issues, 27, 199-217.
55. Kagehiro, D.K. (1990). Defining the standard of proof in jury instructions. Psychological Science, 1, 194-200.
56. Kagehiro, D.K., and Stanton, W.C. (1985). Legal vs. Quantified definitions of standards of proof. Law and Human Behavior, 9, 159-78.
57. Kassin, S.M., and Wrightsman, L.S. (1979). On the requirements of proof: The timing of judicial instruction and mock juror verdicts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1877-87.
58. Katzev, R.D., and Wishart, S.S. (1985). The impact of judicial commentary concerning eyewitness identifications on jury decision making. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 76, 733-45.
59. Kerr, N.L., Atkin, R.S., Stasser, G., Meek, D., Holt, R.W., and Davis, J.H. (1976). Guilt beyond a reasonable doubt: Effects of concept definition and assigned decision rule on the judgments of mock jurors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 282-94.
60. Kerr, N.L., and Sawyers, G.W. (1979). Independence of multiple verdicts within a trial by mock jurors. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 10, 16-27.
61. Kerwin, J., and Shaffer, D.R. (1991). The effects of jury dogmatism on reactions to jury nullification instructions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 140-46.
62. Kerwin, J., and Shaffer, D.R. (1994). Mock jurors versus mock juries: The role of deliberations in reactions to inadmissible testimony. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 153-62.
63. Kramer, G., and Koening, D. (1990). Do jurors understand criminal jury instructions? Analyzing the results of the Michigan juror comprehension project. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 23, 401-37.
64. Landsman, S., Diamond, S., Dimitropoulos, L., and Saks, M.J. (1998). Be careful what you wish for: The paradoxical effects of bifurcating claims for punitive damages. Wisconsin Law Review, 1998, 297-342.
65. Levi, J.N. (1993). Evaluating jury comprehension of Illinois capital-sentencing instructions. American Speech, 68, 20-49.
66. Levine, J.P. (1984). The legislative role of juries. American Bar Foundation Journal, 605-34.
67. Lieberman, J.D., and Arndt, J. (2000). Understanding the limits of limiting instructions: Social psychological explanations for the failures of instructions to disregard pretrial publicity and other inadmissible evidence. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6, 677-711.
68. Lieberman, J.D., and Sales, B.D. (1997). What social sciences teaches us about the jury instruction process. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3, 1-56.
69. McCauliff, C.M.A. (1982). Burden of proof: Degrees of belief, quanta of evidence, or constitutional guarantees. Vanderbilt Law Review, 35, 1293-355.
70. Nagel, S. (1979). Bringing the values of jurors in line with the law. Judicature, 63, 189-95.
71. Nieland R.G. (1979). Pattern Jury Instructions: A Critical Look at the Modern Movement to Improve the Jury System. Chicago, IL: American Judicature Society.
72. Ogloff, J.R. (1991). A comparison of insanity defense standards on juror decision making. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 509-31.
73. Ogloff, J.R.P. (1998). Judicial instructions and the jury: A comparison of alternative strategies. Final report. Vancouver: British Columbia Law Foundation.
74. Cited in: Ogloff, J.R.P., and Rose, V.G. (2005). The comprehension of judicial instructions. In N. Brewer and K.D. Williams (eds), Psychology and Law: An Empirical Perspective. New York: Guilford. pp. 407-444.
75. Ogloff, J.R.P., and Rose, V.G. (2005). The comprehension of judicial instructions. In N. Brewer and K.D. Williams (eds), Psychology and Law: An Empirical Perspective. New York: Guilford. pp. 407-444.
76. Prager, I.G., Deckelbaum, G., and Cutler, B.L. (1989). Improving juror understanding for intervening causation instructions. Forensic Reports, 3, 187-93.
77. Ramirez, G., Zemba, D., and Geiselman, R.E. (1996). Judge's cautionary instructions on eyewitness testimony. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 14, 31-66.
78. Reifman, A., Gusick, S.M., and Ellsworth, P.C. (1992). Real jurors' understanding of the law in real cases. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 539-54.
79. Rokeach, M. (1960). The Open and Closed Mind. New York: Basic Books.
80. Rose, V.G., and Ogloff, J.R.P. (2001). Evaluating the comprehensibility of jury instructions: A method and an example. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 409-31.
81. Saks, M.J., Hollinger, L.A., Wissler, R.L., Evans, D.L., and Hart, A.J. (1997). Reducing variability in civil jury awards. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 243-256.
82. Sales, B.D., Elwork, A., and Alfini, J.J. (1977). Improving comprehension for jury instructions. In B.D. Sales (ed.), Perspectives in Law and Psychology Volume 1: The Criminal Justice System. New York: Plenum.
83. Saxton, B. (1998). How well do jurors understand jury instructions? A field test using real juries and real trials in Wyoming. Land and Water Law Review, 33, 59-189.
84. Schmolesky, J.M., Cutler, B.L., and Penrod, S.D. (1988). Presumption instructions and juror decision making. Forensic Reports, 1, 165-92.
85. Semmler, C., and Brewer, N. (2002). Using a flow-chart to improve comprehension of jury instructions. Psychiatry, Psychology, and Law, 9, 262-70.
86. Severance, L.J., Greene, E., and Loftus, E.F. (1984). Toward criminal jury instructions that jurors can understand. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 75, 198-233.
87. Severance, L.J., and Loftus, E.F. (1982). Improving the ability of jurors to comprehend and apply criminal jury instructions. Law and Society Review, 17, 153-98.
88. Severance, L.J., and Loftus, E.F. (1984). Improving criminal justice: Making jury instructions understandable for American jurors. International Review of Applied Psychology, 33, 97-119.
89. Shaffer, D.R., and Kerwin, J. (1992). On adhering to judicial instructions: Reactions of dogmatic and nondogmatic juries to the judge's charge in an entrapment case. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1133-47.
90. Shaffer, D.R., and Wheatman, S.R. (2000). Does personality influence reactions to judicial instructions? Some preliminary findings and possible implications. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6, 655-76.
91. Simon, R.J. (1970). "Beyond a reasonable doubt": An experimental attempt at quantification. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 6, 203-209.
92. Simon, R.J., and Mahan, L. (1971). Quantifying burdens of proof: A view from the bench, the jury, and the classroom. Law and Society Review, 5, 319-30.
93. Smith, V.L. (1991a). Prototypes in the courtroom: Lay representations of legal concepts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 857-72.
94. Smith, V.L. (1991b). Impact of pretrial instruction on jurors' information processing and decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 220-28.
95. Snyder, M. (1987). Public Appearances/Private Realities: The Psychology of Selfmonitoring. New York: W.H. Freeman.
96. Steele, W.W., and Thornburg, E.G. (1988). Jury instructions: A persistent failure to communicate. North Carolina Law Review, 67, 77-119.
97. Stoffelmayr, E., and Diamond, S.S. (2000). The conflict between precision and flexibility in explaining "Beyond a reasonable doubt." Psychology, Public Policy, And Law, 6, 769-87.
98. Strawn, D.U., and Buchanan, R.W. (1976). Jury confusion: A threat to justice. Judicature, 59, 478-83.
99. Tanford, J.A. (1991). Law reform by courts, legislatures, and commissions following empirical research on jury instructions. Law and Society Review, 25, 155-75.
100. Tanford, S., and Penrod, S. (1982). Biases in trials involving multiple defendants charged with multiple offenses. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 12, 453-480.
101. Tanford, S. and Penrod, S. (1984). Social inference processes in juror judgments of multiple-offence trials. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 749-65.
102. Tanford, S., Penrod, S., and Collins, R. (1985). Decision making in joined criminal trials: the influence of charge similarity, evidence similarity, and limiting instructions. Law and Human Behavior, 9, 319-37.
103. United States v. Telfaire, 469 F.2d 552 (D.C. Cir. 1972).
104. Wiener, R.L., Pritchard, C.C., and Weston, M. (1995). Comprehensibility of approved jury instructions in capital murder cases. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 455-67.
105. Wiggins, E.C., and Breckler, S.J. (1990). Special verdicts as guides to jury decisionmaking. Law and Psychology Review, 14, 1-41.
106. Zander, M., and Henderson, P. (1993). Crown Court study, Research study no. 19 for the Royal Commission on Criminal Justice. London: HMSO.