The Effects of Pretrial Publicity on Juror Verdicts: A Meta-Analytic Review

The effect of pretrial publicity (PTP) on juror verdicts was examined through a meta-analysis of 44 empirical tests representing 5,755 subjects. In support of the hypothesis, subjects exposed to negative PTP were significantly more likely to judge the defendant guilty compared to subjects exposed to less or no negative PTP. Greater effect sizes were produced in studies which included a pretrial verdict assessment, use of the potential juror pool as subjects, multiple points of negative information included in the PTP, real PTP, crimes of murder, sexual abuse, or drugs, and greater length of time between PTP exposure and judgment. The effect was attenuated with student subjects, use of general rather than specific PTP information, certain types of PTP content, a post-trial predeliberation verdict, and specific types of crimes. Implications of these results are discussed, along with possible mechanisms that underlie the PTP effect.     

An Archival Analysis of Actual Cases of Historic Child Sexual Abuse: A Comparison of Jury and Bench Trials

Logistic regression analyses were used to predict verdicts from 466 Canadian jury and 644 Canadian judge-alone criminal trials involving delayed or historic allegations of child sexual abuse. Variables in regard to the complainant and offence were selected from the legal, clinical, and experimental literatures, including mock juror research. Of six variables that had been related to decisions reached in mock juror research concerning delayed allegations of child sexual abuse (i.e., repressed memory testimony, involvement in therapy, length of delay, age of complainant, presence of experts, and frequency of abuse) two (age of complainant and presence of expert) predicted verdicts. An additional five variables (duration, severity, complainant–accused relationship, threats, and complainant gender) were also examined: of these, threats and the complainant–accused relationship reliably predicted jury verdicts. For judge-alone trials, five variables predicted verdict: length of the delay, offence severity, claims of repression, the relationship between complainant and accused, and presence of an expert. Implications of the jurors' and judges' differential sensitivity to these variables for future simulation and archival research are discussed.     

Crime Prototypes,Objective Versus Subjective Culpability,and a Commonsense Balance

Crime prototypes, which have been linked to jurors' story constructions and verdicts, were elaborated through narratives, yielding 600 detailed stories, across seven different cases, in two experiments. These stories were manipulated under conditions that explored the prototypicality of the case, she verdict outcome, and whether it was a rightful or wrongful decision; the latter two manipulations, when combined, allowed for a comparison of actual outcomes versus true outcomes, and a measure of true culpability. Three or four prototypes, rather than one, emerged for all crimes, and though extraordinary rather than typical, they were far from simplistic. While the subjective element of motive dominated the culpability determination in Experiment I, objectivity prevailed in most cases in Experiment II. A commonsense and complex balancing of objective and subjective factors is the rule, while simplism was the rare exception.     

On Finding for Defendants Who Plead Insanity: The Crucial Impact of Dispositional Instructions and Opportunity to Deliberate

One hundred twenty participants functioned as mock-jurors and as members of deliberating juries in an experiment designed to assess the impact of dispositional instruction on verdicts rendered in an insanity trial. Consistent with prior research (K. E. & J. R. Ogloff, 1995), dispositional instruction had no effect on the verdict preferences of individual jurors prior to deliberating. Yet, as expected, the instruction manipulation had a major impact on postdeliberative decisions (i.e., group verdicts; individual juror verdict preferences). Content analyses of jury deliberations revealed that postdeliberative shifts toward harsh verdicts in uninstructed juries and toward lenient verdicts in instructed juries were mediated by the impact of the Instruction manipulation on the content of jury deliberations: uninstructed juries feared that an acquitted-insane defendant would be freed to act again, whereas instructed juries recognized that finding for an insane defendant implied his retention and treatment. Implications of these results for both legal policy and the conduct of mock-trial research are discussed.     

The objective reality of evidence and the utility of systematic jury selection

Significant relationships between jurors' demographic characteristics, attitudes, and verdicts have stimulated an interest in systematic jury selection. However, critics of this approach argue that verdicts are based on the strength of the evidence presented rather than on the composition of the jury. This analysis of demographic and attitudinal data and the responses to a vignette collected from a jury-eligible sample explores the association between perception of strength of evidence and both case-relevant attitudes and demographic characteristics and then examines the amount of variation in verdict explained by juror characteristics when strength of evidence is already taken into account. The findings point to the inclusion of strength of evidence in systematic jury selection procedures.     

The Mr. Big technique on trial by jury

Mr. Big is a Canadian undercover police technique used to elicit confessions. Undercover officers befriend the suspect, and gradually draw them into a fictitious criminal organization. Upon meeting the boss of the organization, ‘Mr. Big’, the suspect is pressured to confess. When evidence from the sting operation, including the confession, is presented later in court, it may induce juror moral prejudice towards a defendant. We evaluated how situational and dispositional sting factors (crime task severity, financial incentive, and defendant intelligence) influence mock juror moral prejudice and decision-making in Mr. Big cases. Results from Experiment 1 (N?=?270) showed fewer guilty verdicts in the high incentive conditions. In Experiment 2 (N?=?1,666), high incentive and low defendant intelligence were related to fewer guilty verdicts, more favorable ratings of defendant character, and more skeptical evaluations of confession evidence. Additionally, there were differences between community and student participants on multiple outcomes.     

Predicting verdicts,adherence to judge's instructions,and assumptions about the disposition of the defendant in a case involving the insanity defense

Abstract

296 college students and jury eligible adults completed attitudinal measures and read a case summary of a murder trial involving the insanity defense. The case summary included opening and closing arguments, testimony from expert witnesses, and judge's instructions. Although broader legal attitudes (the PJAQ) predicted verdicts, the Insanity Defense Attitudes-Revised scale provided incremental predictive validity. Attitudes related to the insanity defense also predicted adherence to judge's instructions, whereas more general legal biases predicted a juror's willingness to change their verdict after being provided with accurate information about the defendant's disposition following the verdict. Importantly, misconceptions concerning the insanity defense impacted verdicts and many jurors made decisions that failed to adhere to the judge's instructions, though the nullification tendency does appear to vary as a function of pretrial juror attitudes. Implications for instructing jurors in insanity defense cases will be discussed.     

An Examination of Jury Verdicts for Evidence of a Similarity-Leniency Effect,an Out-Group Punitiveness Effect or a Black Sheep Effect

Archival data from cases adjudicated by jury in El Paso and Bexar County, Texas, were used to test whether a similarity-leniency effect, an out-group punitiveness effect, or a black sheep effect (BSE; J. M. Marques, V Y. Yzerbyt, & J. P. Leyens, 1988) influenced jury decisions. Defendant ethnicity, jury ethnic composition, and strength of evidence against the defendant were coded for 418 closed noncapital, felony cases to test their impact on trial verdicts and sentence lengths. Results indicated complex relations exist among juror and defendant characteristics and their influence on trial outcomes. No support was found for any of the theoretical models as predictors of jury decision-making. Strength of evidence was the most influential variable for both verdicts and length of sentences. Case strength, defendant ethnicity, and jury composition were related to sentence lengths.     

Identifying and measuring juror pre-trial bias for forensic evidence: development and validation of the Forensic Evidence Evaluation Bias Scale

Abstract

Previous research has provided support for the impact of juror pre-trial bias on judicial decision making, particularly in cases where the evidence presented at trial is of weak or ambiguous probative value. In an effort to identify whether a pre-trial bias for forensic evidence exists, the Forensic Evidence Evaluation Bias Scale (FEEBS) was developed and tested. The results of a principal components analysis suggested that two distinct constructs were being measured, corresponding to a pro-prosecution and pro-defence bias toward forensic evidence. In a second validation study, scores on these two subscales were compared with other existing juror bias measures (Juror Bias Scale and Belief in a Just World) and in a mock juror decision making task only the pro-prosecution subscale of the FEEBS predicted the perceived strength of forensic evidence. A partial mediation model is presented which explains the relationship between this bias and verdict preferences. The implications of this potential juror bias are discussed in the context of real juries, the CSI Effect (which refers to anecdotal claims that jurors are biased by the popularity of fictional representations of forensic science on television) and peremptory challenges, as well as future research directions.     

Religious fundamentalism,religiosity, and priming: effects on attitudes,perceptions, and mock jurors’ decisions in an insanity defense case

Jurors are asked to use their personal knowledge and experience to make verdict decisions; thus, it is no surprise that their religious beliefs might influence their decisions. During legal insanity trials, jurors might also be exposed to religious stimuli (e.g. crucifix, prayer, Bible, etc.), which could evoke (prime) religious beliefs and thus influence decisions. Two studies examined whether dimensions of religiosity and religious beliefs relate to attitudes and decisions concerning mental health defenses, testing social identity theory against Allport and Ross’s religiosity hypothesis. In Study 1 (attitudes survey) and Study 2 (mock juror decision-making paradigm), religious fundamentalist beliefs consistently predicted punitive attitudes and decisions related to mental health defenses and verdicts, and this was moderated by intrinsic religiosity, such that religious fundamentalist beliefs only predicted punitiveness for individuals low in intrinsic religiosity. Also, priming fundamentalist beliefs increased punitiveness in both verdict and sentencing decisions. Combined, these results suggest that religious beliefs play a role in jurors’ verdict decisions in an insanity case, and that priming fundamentalist beliefs increases jurors’ punitiveness. Allport and Ross’s religiosity hypothesis was supported, but social identity theory was not.     

Estimating Juror Accuracy,Juror Ability,and the Relationship Between Them

This article advances a method based on standard test theories and measurement models to determine correct verdicts for jury trials, and to estimate juror accuracy, juror ability, and trial difficulty (and the relationships among them). With five vignette cases and 1,318 juror eligible adults as the subjects, the model consistently identified verdicts that accorded with the judge’s instructions on the law as correct. With the correct verdicts, the strength of the relationship between juror accuracy and juror ability was found to be substantial. These findings suggest that the assumption of equivalent accuracy of jurors underlying the Condorcet’s jury theorem (Condorcet, Essai sur l’Application de l’Analyse a la Probabilite des Decisions Rendues a la Pluralite des Voix, Paris, 1785) may be untenable for general cases where jurors of diverse dispositions and abilities serve together; and that the role of juror ability in determining the accuracy of legal decisions could be more significant than that of attitudes and values because, unlike attitudes and values, ability could affect juror’s legal decisions regardless of the type of the case.     

The effects of attorney presentation style,attorney gender,and juror gender on juror decisions

Extralegal characteristics of attorneys may play a significant role in the decision-making behavior of jurors. Presentation style, for example, is one factor to which trial lawyers pay a great deal of attention. However, a given style of speech may not be perceived equivalently when used by different speakers. The present study examined the effects of the defense attorney's presentation style and gender, and juror gender on jurors' verdicts and evaluation of the attorney and witness. Undergraduate college students read a brief summary of an assault-and-robbery case, viewed a videotape of either a passive or aggressive male or female attorney interrogating a witness, then rendered a verdict and rated the witness and attorney on characteristics such as competency, credibility, and assertiveness. The results indicated that, overall, aggressive attorneys were more successful at obtaining an acquittal for their clients than passive attorneys, and that male attorneys were more successful than female attorneys; presentation style also interacted with gender of attorney and juror. Some possible mechanisms for these effects are discussed.     

Chaos in The Courtroom Reconsidered: Emotional Bias and Juror Nullification

A widespread presumption in the law is that giving jurors nullification instructions would result in "chaos"-jurors guided not by law but by their emotions and personal biases. We propose a model of juror nullification that posits an interaction between the nature of the trial (viz. whether the fairness of the law is at issue), nullification instructions, and emotional biases on juror decision-making. Mock jurors considered a trial online which varied the presence a nullification instructions, whether the trial raised issues of the law's fairness (murder for profit vs. euthanasia), and emotionally biasing information (that affected jurors' liking for the victim). Only when jurors were in receipt of nullification instructions in a nullification-relevant trial were they sensitive to emotionally biasing information. Emotional biases did not affect evidence processing but did affect emotional reactions and verdicts, providing the strongest support to date for the chaos theory.     

Effects of pretrial juror bias,strength of evidence and deliberation process on juror decisions: new validity evidence of the Juror Bias Scale scores

This study examines the validity of the Juror Bias Scale scores in relation to the mock juror decisions reached in two real life homicide cases before and after the deliberation process. The judicial cases used varied in terms of the ambiguity of the evidence presented at both trials. The WLS methodology for statistical modelling of categorical data was used to analyse data. The findings indicated that the Juror Bias Scale scores successfully predict the verdicts and other related questions before and after deliberations in the case with ambiguous evidence. Furthermore, deliberations caused a generalisation effect on the pretrial juror bias in such a case, and enhanced the differences between defense-biased and prosecution-biased jurors in the verdicts delivered after deliberations. The implications of these findings are discussed in relation to the use of pretrial juror bias questionnaires in jury selection.     

Trial complexity

A field experiment is reported that examines the effects of trial complexity and trial procedures on jury performance. Juror question asking and notetaking were randomly assigned to 75 civil and 85 criminal trials. Principal components analyses of judges' responses revealed three components of trial complexity: evidence complexity, legal complexity, and quantity of information. None of these components was significantly related to judge-jury verdict agreement. Each component uniquely affected jurors' assessment of the trial, but none affected theirs or the judges' verdict satisfaction. Interactions reveal that juror questions were most beneficial for assisting the jurors with legal complexity and evidence complexity. Natural variation in judges' commenting on the weight and credibility of witnesses, or summarizing the evidence, use of special verdict forms, pattern instructions, and juror orientation was also measured. Of these, the use of special verdict forms appeared to provide the greatest benefits.     

性骚扰的民事责任初探

性骚扰的民事责任在中国属于新兴的研究课题。本文试图根据比较方法对性骚扰概念与性骚扰立法所保护的对象作出必要的法律界定 ;同时侧重讨论了证明性骚扰案件的证据问题和构成性骚扰的民事赔偿问题。     

性骚扰民事诉讼特别规制研究

对于日益增多的性骚扰案件,研究如何在民事诉讼方面进行特别的规制是至关重要的.根据性骚扰案件的特点,从证据、审理和救济三大方面作出符合性骚扰案件特性的规定:(1)合理运用证据规则,实现证明责任的特殊配置,并且在取证方式的合法性问题上予以适当的放宽;(2)在性骚扰案件的审理期间要特别注重对诉讼参加人的隐私权进行严格的保密与保护;(3)确立惩罚性赔偿以及用人单位责任,切实保护性骚扰案件的受害者,法院还可以适当运用司法建议的方式来遏止和预防职场性骚扰行为的发生.     

Juror background characteristics and attitudes toward rape

Although numerous writers have discussed the importance of and link between juror characteristics and juror decisions in rape trials, anempirical investigation of the relationships between these characteristics and juror verdicts has not been made. Using data obtained from a sample of 896 citizens serving as mock jurors, the principal focus of the present research was on the correlations of jurors' background characteristics and their attitudes toward rape with their decisions in a simulated rape case. Results of the study showed that the jurors' background and attitudinal variables were associated with their decisions. In addition, the pattern of the correlations was quite stable as the characteristics of the case evaluated (in terms of defendant and victim race, victim physical attractiveness, victim sexual experience, strength of evidence presented, and type of rape committed) were found to have only negligible effects on these relationships. Other tests showed that only the attitudinal variables accounted for differences in the jurors' decisionsafter characteristics of the case had been considered. Further, as compared to background data, the jurors' views of rape were the most important predictor of their decisions. Implications of the role of jurors' views of rape in jurors' decisions in rape trials and the use of rape attitudes for selecting jury members in rape cases discussed.     

Juror reactions to child victim witnesses

Trial variables that might affect juror decisions were examined in two experiments. In Experiment 1, the impact of (1) corroboration, (2) type of case (civil vs. criminal), and (3) victim age (6. 9, or 12 years) was examined. Participants (N=379) read a trial summary describing a wrongful injury or sexual abuse case and were asked to make decisions regarding the case. Results revealed a significant interaction between age and corroboration. Corroboration increased the number of guilty verdicts for the 6- and 12-year-olds, yet had little impact in the case with the 9-year-old. the type of the case did not interact with child age in affecting jurors' decisions. Experiment 2 examined the role of a child's age more systematically. The trial summary described the corroborated sexual abuse case (utilized in Experiment I) and varied the age of the victim from 6 to 14 years. Analyses revealed that number of guilty verdicts and credibility decreased with age, whereas amount of blame attributed to the victim increased with age. Reasons for the negative age bias are discussed.