Complex scientific testimony: How do jurors make decisions?

Critics of the civil jury system question whether jurors can adequately evaluate complex expert testimony. Based on current models of research in persuasion, we hypothesized that when expert testimony is complex, factors other than content will influence persuasion. Participants, serving as mock jurors, watched a videotaped trial in which two scientists provided evidence on whether PCBs could have caused a plaintiff's illness. The complexity of the expert's testimony and the strength of the expert's credentials were varied in a 2×2 factorial design. After watching the videotape, mock jurors rendered a verdict and completed a number of attitude measures related to the trial. Overall, consistent with our prediction, we found that jurors were more persuaded by a highly expert witness than by a less expert witness, but only when the testimony was highly complex. When the testimony was less complex, jurors relied primarily on the content of that testimony, and witness credentials had little impact on the persuasiveness of the message.     

WHAT MAKES A FAMILY?

This note analyzes the issue of gay and lesbian adoption. Although such adoptions are becoming more accepted in the United States, there remain a few states—Florida, Mississippi, and Utah—that have banned gay and lesbian adoptions. This note will propose new legislative language for adoption laws in conservative states.     

Gender equality and social security

He is author of Capitalism and the Welfare State; Clients and Constituents;and co-author (with Barbara Gilbert) of The Enabling State: Modern Welfare Capitalism in America;and (with Joel Duerr Berrick) With the Best of Intentions: The Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Movement.     

Generic Prejudice and the Presumption of Guilt in Sex Abuse Trials

In 25 Canadian criminal trials involving charges of sexual abuse, 849 prospective jurors were asked under oath whether they could hear the evidence, follow the judge's instructions on the Jaw, and decide the case with a fair and impartial mind. Knowing only the nature of the charges against the accused, on average 36% of the jurors stated that they could not be impartial Some jurors explained that they themselves had been victims of abuse, others expressed fears for children, while others stated simply that they could not set aside a presumption of guilt. These findings from real trials are consistent with a body of social science literature about attitudes toward sexual abuse and sexual assault charges. The article distinguishes between prejudices arising from specific pretrial publicity and generic prejudices that cause prejudgments of the case of any defendant perceived as belonging to a general class of defendants who likely are guilty of the crime(s) charged.     

Federal laboratories & American industry: Fueling innovation

With a little-used gold mine of federal technical resources available to American industry, and adequate networking structure to expedite the transfer of valuable information is needed. The US government's laboratories have assisted some corporations, particularly those in defense-oriented industries, through collaborative research activities. To face the competition from abroad, a greater segment of American industry, of necessity, must tap the technical information and assistance available within the maze of federal laboratories to convert new and existing research into tangible, marketable products. NERAC has designed and tested an accessing model that matches the technological needs of American industry with federal experts through an existing network of federal-laboratory technology-transfer officers. The process is uncomplicated and direct. As a knowledgeable liaison, NERAC has developed a communication network to facilitate the transfer of often-unique material from the federal laboratories to American industry.