Death penalty attitudes and conviction proneness |
| |
Authors: | William C. Thompson Claudia L. Cowan Phoebe C. Ellsworth Joan C. Harrington |
| |
Affiliation: | (1) Program in Social Ecology, University of California-Irvine, 92717 Irvine, California;(2) Attorney at Law, 2002 South Circle View Drive, Suite D, 92715 Irvine, California;(3) Department of Psychology, Stanford University, 94305 Stanford, California;(4) School of Law, New York University, 10012 New York, New York |
| |
Abstract: | Attitudes toward the death penalty are consistently predictive of jurors' verdicts in criminal trials. Two studies were conducted to find out why. In Study 1, eligible jurors viewed a videotape showing conflicting testimony by a prosecution and defense witness in an assault case. Death-qualified subjects (those permitted to serve on capital juries) interpreted testimony in a manner more favorable to the prosecution than excludable subjects (those excluded from serving on juries in capital cases due to their opposition to the death penalty), suggesting that differing interpretations of evidence may mediate the relationship between attitudes toward the death penalty and verdicts. In Study 2, the same jurors indicated their reactions to a number of hypothetical situations in which a jury had convicted an innocent defendant or acquitted a guilty one. Death qualified subjects expressed less regret concerning erroneous convictions and more regret concerning erroneous acquittals than excludable subjects. Theoretical interpretations of this pattern of results suggest that death qualified subjects may have a lower threshold of conviction than excludable subjects; thus the relationship between attitudes toward the death penalty and verdicts may also be mediated by differing thresholds of conviction.During the course of this research, William C. Thompson was supported, in part, by a National Science Foundation graduate fellowship. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|