Jurors' interpretations and jury decision making

In arriving at their verdicts, jurors must determine what really happened in the case at hand. Their interpretations then guide their decision making and become influential in the group deliberation process. This article uses conversational data from simulated jury deliberations to describe jurors' practice of articulating schematic interpretations as accounts for their verdict choices, and as means for persuading other jurors. As jurors contribute additional interpretations during deliberations, the group decision-making task becomes more complex, deliberations las longer, and they are more difficult to resolve. A significant negative relation is established between the number of interpretations articulated and the jury's likelihood of reaching a unanimous verdict. Articulating multiple interpretations in support of a candidate verdict appears to militate against its unanimous adoption.I am endebted to Andre Modigliani and Joseph Sanders for their invaluable assistance on this project.     

Sociological interpretations of legal development

This paper seeks to outline some ways in which sociological inquiry has helped to interpret general processes of legal development. It comments on a few aspects of a vast subject. Furthermore, it was commissioned in a specific context of debate: as part of an agenda of discussion of the relative merits and potential of sociological and economic analyses of law. Hence, to provide a setting for what I try to argue about the character and value of sociological interpretations of legal change, it seems appropriate to preface those arguments with some general ideas about the nature of sociological inquiries in legal contexts and about perceived contrasts between the orientation of these inquiries and what I take to be certain orientations in economic analysis of law. Accordingly this paper is in two parts. The first offers a few prefatory remarks on the character of theoretically guided sociological inquiries about law (sociology of law). The second discusses various kinds of interpretation of legal development, which have been offered from the perspectives of sociology of law.     

Juror interpretations of ambiguous evidence

In the context of a mock jury study, we tested the hypothesis that people's interpretations of ambiguous evidence depend on how (i.e., by whom) that evidence is introduced. Subjects watched a 45-min interrogation of a murder suspect who emphatically asserted her innocence but told an imperfect story. Before the tape, subjects read either the prosecution or defense lawyer's arguments concerning the suspect's interrogation performance; after the tape, they read counter-arguments from the opposing side. Results indicated that subjects high in the need for cognition (NC) were influenced more by arguments that preceded the evidence, whereas low-NC subjects were more influenced by arguments that followed the evidence. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.     

儿童权利的文化解释

In China, the protection of juvenile rights has historically been a secondary consideration, which is often relegated to the status of “goal for the future”. However, the value of juvenile rights and their protection lie not only in the morality of child protection, but also in the role that juvenile rights can play in the development of human rights as a whole. Publicity given to juvenile rights reminds us of the “adult society” standing in complementary opposition to the “juvenile society” that juvenile rights refer to. It is adult society to deal with juvenile rights, so any errors of understanding or failures of equality can lead to children being deprived of the rights. The rational underpinnings of juvenile rights are the weapons with which we can counter the influence of traditional, conservative thinking. These arguments will allow children to assume their rightful role as an independent group whose rights are academically and practically accepted and protected.     

Philadelphia's ``Black Mafia': Assessing and advancing current interpretations

In the history and the study of organizedcrime, the validity and reliability ofsources have been particularly problematicmatters. Governmental fact-finding bodiesare frequently cited in this research area,including the now-defunct PennsylvaniaCrime Commission. For example, studiesoccasionally reference Philadelphia's``Black Mafia,' and each of these inquiriesrelies upon the work of the PennsylvaniaCrime Commission for ``analysis' of thegroup. In this article, the Commission'sfindings are presented and then critiqued. Significant Black Mafia activitiesunder-researched by the Commission are nextanalyzed, adding context to the currentunderstanding of the group. The articlechallenges current assumptions, places thegroup's history in context, and illustratesthe utility of primary source research.     

网络传媒下公共治理的危机及其对策

随着互联网技术的发展和普及,公共治理日益显现在大众的视域内。网络传媒的任意性、霸权性和非理性会导致公共治理失序、失范和失真,对我国政府形象和执政理念形成强烈的冲击。在此背景下,我们要不断加强网络传媒与公共治理者的互动和交流,建立政府公共服务网,规范和引导网络话语,以期更好地化解网络传媒力量日益强大背景下我国公共治理的危机。     

风险社会与现代行政法的危机

当代社会是风险社会,人的衣、食、住、行等各个方面都面临难以预测的风险。风险社会对产生于现代工业社会背景下的行政法的诸环节行政立法、执法、司法均构成巨大的冲击和挑战,现代行政法面临合法性危机。     

Practicing psychologists' interpretations of and compliance with child abuse reporting laws

Despite mandatory reporting laws, several studies have found that 30%–40% of professional psychologists have elected not to report suspected child abuse at some time. In this study, we surveyed 226 licensed psychologists from two states concerning factors related to reporting suspected abuse. Thirty-two percent of participants indicated having not reported suspected abuse. Comparisons between participants who have consistently and inconsistently reported indicated that psychologists who have consistently reported rated legal factors as more important than those who have inconsistently reported. Additionally, clinicians who have inconsistently reported were more likely to indicate evidence of abuse as being important in reporting, and less likely to report subjective suspicions of abuse. Results show that a number of factors influence reporting decisions. Implications for public policy and professional training are discussed.     

Social and social scientific perspectives in judicial interpretations of the constitution

It has been traditional to demarcateMuller v. Oregon as the first Supreme Court case to benefit from a social science perspective andBrown v. Board of Education of Topeka as the first case to rely on social science evidence. This article explores the hypothesis that social perspectives have long been a part of the Court's decisionmaking when it has confronted difficult social issues. Two 19th-century race opinions,Dred Scott v. Sandford andPlessy v. Ferguson, are used to support this position. The authors suggest that the social perspectives contained in the other articles in this special issue reflect a long-standing association between social science information and law.We appreciate the suggestions made by Michael J. Saks on an earlier draft of this article.     

司法鉴定程序通则的修改与解读

我国司法鉴定程序通则从2002年试行到2007年作为部门规章颁布实施,对规范司法鉴定程序发挥了重要作用.通则在实施过程中因“三大”诉讼法修改与司法改革推进,其中有些规定不能满足现行诉讼的需要以及本身体系结构不科学、程序内容不完善等影响其作用的有效发挥,为此2016年对其进行了修订.这次修订不仅对内容进行了删减与增补,同时还在体系结构上进行了调整,对完善司法鉴定程序、规范司法鉴定行为以及推进司法鉴定改革均具有重要意义.但这次修订还存在条款表述模糊与需要解决的程序内容被遗漏等问题.对于这些问题在通则实施时不仅需要从修订本意上予以说明,还需要从理论解读中予以适当填补,以保障其有效实施并达到修订的目的.     

海洛因、咖啡因的FTIR检验及谱图解释

目的提高用红外光谱法鉴定海洛因、咖啡因纯品、混合物伪品的水平。方法用红外光谱法有针对性地选择特征峰 ,探明海洛因、咖啡因红外光谱与结构的关系。结果获得海洛因、咖啡因的特征峰。结论该方法克服了鉴定中的盲目性。     

论我国如何建立政府危机管理机制

本文反思了政府在处理非典事件的有关行政行为,分析这次病疫恶化的原因,探讨中国加强政府危机管理的必要性,并借鉴有关国家处理危机事件的经验,根据中国实际情况并围绕着政府如何建立危机管理机制,从立法、政府、新闻媒体、民众和国际协作等五个方面作了探讨.     

Effects of judicial instructions and juror characteristics on interpretations of beyond reasonable doubt

The standard of proof, beyond reasonable doubt (BRD), serves as a threshold for reaching verdicts in criminal cases. Past research has demonstrated that factors such as the wording of judicial instructions defining the standard can influence people's interpretation of it. In addition, there is some concern that instructions may not be effective for the wider jury-eligible population. In an experimental study involving members of the general public, we examined the effect of two commonly used judicial instructions (i.e. sure and firmly convinced) against a situation when BRD was undefined, on people's quantitative interpretations of BRD as well as on their self-reported understanding of the standard and confidence in applying it. We also explored the effect of juror characteristics (i.e. gender, age and education). Compared to when the standard was undefined, the sure instruction helped to reduce inter-individual variability in interpretations of BRD and the firmly convinced instruction increased people's understanding of the standard. However, neither instruction was effective in increasing confidence in applying the standard or in reducing observed individual differences. These findings underscore the importance of developing evidence-based judicial instructions that can benefit the broad jury-eligible population equally and in a variety of ways.