Younger and older adults’ lie-detection and credibility judgments of children's coached reports

ABSTRACT

Previous research has examined young and middle-aged adults’ perceptions of child witnesses; however, no research to date has examined how potential older adult jurors may perceive a child witness. The present investigation examined younger (18–30 years, N?=?100) and older adults’ (66–89 years, N?=?100) lie-detection and credibility judgments when viewing children's truthful and dishonest reports. Participants viewed eight child interview videos where children (9–11 years of age) either provided a truthful report or a coached fabricated report to conceal a transgression. Participants provided lie-detection judgments following all eight videos and credibility assessments following the first two videos. Participants completed a General Lifespan Credibility questionnaire to assess credibility evaluations across various witness ages. Lie-detection results indicated that older adults had significantly lower discrimination scores, a stronger truth bias, and greater confidence compared to younger adults. Older adults also rated children as more competent to testify in court, credible, honest, believable, and likeable than younger adults. Participants with greater differences in their credibility evaluations for truth and lie-tellers were significantly more accurate at detecting lies. Responses to the Lifespan Credibility questionnaire revealed significant differences in younger and older adults’ credibility evaluations across the lifespan.     

陪审在现代法治社会中的功能--以形式合理性为中心的若干思考

法治及其形式合理性有着先天的局限性,法律适用过程中不可避免地会遭遇到各种"困难案件".陪审团在审判过程中的职能包括在认定事实的基础上适用法律,在适用法律的过程中贯彻社会价值观念、修正法律规则.陪审团在困难案件的审理中具有维护、修改、补充和促进形式合理性的法的作用.在法治社会中,法官依照形式合理性的法断案是一条准则,但困难案件的审理作为一种例外,应当有陪审团参与审判.     

Twitter thou doeth?

Twitter, which started as a micro-blogging website, is the third most popular social network next to Facebook and My Space. Twitter is increasingly becoming primary means of communication among individuals and businesses. It is now being used in courts for issuing injunctions. However, Twitter “tweets” are also potential litigation minefield for lawyers, businesses and employers. As a social-networking tool, the use of Twitter can raise a variety of legal issues such as the right of publicity, breach of confidentiality, privacy infringement, fraud trademark infringement, copyright infringement, reverse username hijacking, among others.     

浅析人民陪审员制度——以其蕴涵价值为视角

现代陪审制度是基于在司法权力运行中实现人权与民主、限权与制衡理念而设立的。通过民众分享司法权,使民众和政府之间形成有效平衡,彰显民主。本文以陪审制度所蕴涵的价值理念为视角,探讨了我国人民陪审制度存废的相关问题,分析了现行人民陪审员制度的缺陷,进而提出了相应的完善措施。     

论公示在形式主义两种立法模式中的性质

初步分析了公示的存在价值,探讨了公示在形式主义两种立法模式———即物权主义与债权主义中的性质,在此基础之上,提出了自己对公示性质的看法。     

民情:美国陪审制度存在的基础和土壤——对提高我国人民陪审制度运行效果的一个有益的启示

民情是美国陪审制度存在的根基。当这种民情融入美国的文化和传统之中的时候,它就可以有效地消解对陪审制度的各种挑战和质疑,甚至在陪审制度有碍于效率或有悖于公正的时候也能让美国人对其恪守不弃。从美国的经验观之,在推进和谐司法、人民司法的今天,虽然移植西方制度固然重要,但培育和改造我们的民情则更是必不可少。     

公司登记公告与公示法律制度研究

公司登记公告与公示制度在市场经济条件下具有极其重要的意义,一方面它可以实现国家对公司的监督管理,另一方面它能够保证交易安全和社会经济秩序的稳定。但是,我国的公司登记公告与公示制度却存在着很多问题,公告主体不统一、公示方式不健全、公告与公示不能产生应有的对抗力和公信力等。健全和完善我国公司登记公告和公示制度是保证市场经济健康发展的必要条件。     

Strength of Evidence,Extraevidentiary Influence,and the Liberation Hypothesis: Data from the Field

To examine relationships between strength of evidence (SOE) and extraevidentiary variables in the context of Kalven and Zeisel’s (The American Jury, 1966) liberation hypothesis, post-trial questionnaire data were collected from judges, attorneys, and jurors associated with 179 criminal jury trials. SOE ratings were strongly correlated with jury verdicts on the three most serious charges against the defendant, and several extraevidentiary variables (i.e., pretrial publicity, trial complexity, charge severity, and foreperson demographics) were moderately correlated with verdicts. Extraevidentiary-verdict relationships remained significant when SOE was controlled, although extraevidentiary variables yielded only modest improvement in classification accuracy beyond SOE. In partial support of the liberation hypothesis, several case-related extraevidentiary variables were significantly related to jury verdicts only when the prosecution’s evidence was rated as moderately strong.     

“陪审”一词的西来与中译

陪审、陪审员等不是中文固有词汇,而是西学东渐背景下之舶来品。这一组词汇的中文翻译和定型差不多纵贯整个十九世纪,历经中译名混乱的知识性介绍时期——中国知识精英向外寻求真理的中译名模仿时期——推进政制改革的中译名定型时期——《会审章程》和立宪修律中译名进入法案成为法定名等四个过程。陪审制作为一项司法审判制度在清末修律中试图加以移植,可能借鉴了日本的某种经验,但陪审、陪审员作为一组中文译名并非经日本转手才进入中国,它们在中国的翻译和定型应主要归功于以上海公廨为载体的域外法律制度的位移、来华外籍人士和传教士的传播西法西制的努力和本土有识之士的推动。     

The good,the bad,and the ‘vulnerable older adult’

Recent declarations by the Court of Appeal indicate that the inherent jurisdiction has survived the implementation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 for adults considered ‘vulnerable’ and whose decision-making is threatened by reasons other than mental impairment – such occasions may include instances of elder abuse. In this paper I argue, however, that the post-Mental Capacity Act courts have adopted a confused and outmoded concept of the vulnerable older adult, in particular where decision-making is threatened by abusive interpersonal relationships experienced by an older individual. This has particular implications in terms of the types of remedies imposed by the courts on older adults in such circumstances. In this article I suggest that by being more cognisant of recent more nuanced understandings of vulnerability, the courts may be better suited to identifying, and responding to perceived sources of vulnerability in a way that is more empowering for the older adult.     

关于在诉讼活动中设立人民陪审团制度的思考

现代陪审制度是司法机关吸收普通公民参与审判活动的制度,是一个国家政治民主在社会生活中的重要体现,其有助于保障法律有效实施.通过对我国现行人民陪审员制度的分析,揭示其目前存在诸如立法上的不足、专职陪审现象、陪而不审、审而不议、不能切实有效发挥作用等问题.同时以美国、日本为例,比较考察域外陪审制度,借鉴域外有益做法,并结合我国法治建设的实际,主张设立人民陪审团制度,可以有效强化司法裁判中事实认定的正当性和可接受性,真正实现司法民主,促进司法公正,提升司法公信力.     

论“混合制”陪审模式的建立

人民陪审制在我国是舶来品,其建立的基本理念主要有两个方面:一是实现人民参与国家政权的管理和司法民主;一是通过人民陪审员的参与,实现准确认定案件事实、适用法律的目的。我国目前人民陪审制的实际运行与以上两个理念冲突,无法实现人民陪审制的功能。在审判方式改革日益深入的当今时代,英美国家的陪审制对我国人民陪审制的完善具有一定的借鉴意义。为此,我国的人民陪审制改革应在立足人民陪审员对法律适用具有一定的发言权的基础上,借鉴英美陪审制的合理因素,建立我国混合式的人民陪审制。     

英国陪审团评议秘密规则

在英国,陪审团审判不仅是审判手段和宪法的支柱之一,它还显示着自由的存在.陪审团评议秘密规则是英国古老的普通法规则,至今仍然得到判例的认可.该规则的研究可以揭示出丰富的内容.     

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.     

美国死刑量刑程序的历史考察

美国死刑量刑程序经历了一个正当化的历史过程,早期的陪审团废法现象催生了死刑陪审团制度,死刑陪审团制度的建立又引发了死刑案件审判的两分式改革并使死刑量刑程序得以独立,特殊的"凌驾陪审团"规则体现出美国司法界力图保持死刑裁量中职业法官与平民陪审团间的权力制衡。     

陪审制的理性与理性的陪审制——为人民陪审制辩护

我国的人民陪审制具有强大的民主功能,但是在中国的司法实践中,人民陪审制遭遇了极大困境,因而我们必须在制度上完善它。     

Statistical Inference and Forensic Evidence: Evaluating a Bullet Lead Match

This experiment tested the ability of undergraduate mock jurors (N=295) to draw appropriate conclusions from statistical data on the diagnostic value of forensic evidence. Jurors read a summary of a homicide trial in which the key evidence was a bullet lead "match" that was either highly diagnostic, non-diagnostic, or of unknown diagnostic value. There was also a control condition in which the forensic "match" was not presented. The results indicate that jurors as a group used the statistics appropriately to distinguish diagnostic from non-diagnostic forensic evidence, giving considerable weight to the former and little or no weight to the latter. However, this effect was attributable to responses of a subset of jurors who expressed confidence in their ability to use statistical data. Jurors who lacked confidence in their statistical ability failed to distinguish highly diagnostic from non-diagnostic forensic evidence; they gave no weight to the forensic evidence regardless of its diagnostic value. Confident jurors also gave more weight to evidence of unknown diagnostic value. Theoretical and legal implications are discussed.