Advertisement

An analysis of the relationship between jurors' personal attributes and decision making

  • Suman Kakar
Article

Abstract

Using a survey from a jury simulation study, this study examines the relationship between jurors' personal and social attributes and their decision-making behavior. The hypothesis is examined whether personal attributes and socialization of jurors have any significant effect on their decision-making behavior. The analysis suggests that personal and/or social attributes of jurors have little, if any, impact on their decision-making behavior. Instead, jury instruction and information about the matter appear to be major influence contributors. Additionally, evidence presented during the trial and knowledge of law have significant effects upon how jurors decide cases and give verdicts.

Keywords

Domestic Violence Personal Attribute Criminal Psychology Mock Juror Folk Wisdom 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Agresti, A. & Finlay, B. (1986).Statistical Methods for the Social Sciences. London: Collier Macmillan Publishing.Google Scholar
  2. Bohem, V. (1968). “Mr. Prejudice, Miss Sympathy and the authoritarian personality: An application of psychological measuring techniques to the problems of jury bias.”Wisconsin Law Review, 734–750.Google Scholar
  3. Brumbaugh, L. J. (1917). “Legal Reasoning and Briefing.” Indianapolis: Boobs-Merrill Co.Google Scholar
  4. Casper, D., Kennette, B., & Perry, L. (1989). “Juror decision making, attitudes, and hindsight bias.”Law and Human Behavior, 13(3), 291–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chambliss, W. J., & Seidman, R. (1982).Law, Order, and Power 2nd edition. Addison Weseley Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  6. Chambliss, W. J., & Seidman, R. (1971).Law, Order, and Power 1st edition. Addison Weseley Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  7. Crosson, R.E. (1967). “An investigation into certain personality variables among capital trial jurors.”Dissertation Abstracts.Google Scholar
  8. Cutler, B.L., Dexler, H. R., & Penrod, S.D. (1989). “Expert testimony and jury decision making: An empirical Analysis.”Behavioral Sciences and Law, 7(2), 215–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Doob, A.N. & Krishenbaum, H.M. (1973). “Bias in Police Lineups, Partial remembering.”Journal of Police Science and Administration, 1, 287–293.Google Scholar
  10. Efran, M.G. (1974). “The effect of physical appearance on the judgement of guilt”.Journal of Research in Personality, 8, 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Frazier, C.E., & Wilbur, B. (1982). “Effects of court officials on sentence severity: Do judges make a difference?”Criminology, 20, 257–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gibson, J.L. (1978). “Judges' role orientations, attitudes, and judicial decisions: An Interactive Model.”American Political Science Review, 72, 911–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jones, E.E. & Harris, V.A. (1967). “The attribution of attitudes.”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 3(1), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kalvin, H. & Zeisel, H. (1966).The American Jury. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
  15. Klein, K. & B Creech, B. (1982). “Race, rape, and bias: Distortion of prior odds and meaning changes.”Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 3(1), 21–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lamberth, J., Krieger, E., & Shay, S. (1982). “Juror decision making: A case of attitude change mediated by authoritarianism.”Journal of Research in Personality, 16(4), 419–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mossman, K. (1973). “Jury selection: An expert's view.”Psychology Today 6(12), 78–79.Google Scholar
  18. Poulson, R.L. (1990). “Mock juror attribution of criminal responsibility: Effects of race and guilty but mentally ill verdict option.”Journal of Applied Social Psychology 20(19,1) 1596–1611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Richey, M.H., & Fichter, J.J. (1969). “Sex differences in Moralism and punitiveness.”Psychonomics Science, 16, 185–86.Google Scholar
  20. Saks, M.J. (1977).Jury Verdicts. Lexington, Mass.: Heath 1977.Google Scholar
  21. Saks, M.J. & Hastie, R. (1978).Social Psychology in Court. Van Nostrand, R. Co.Google Scholar
  22. Seely, A.P., & Cornish, W.R. (1973). “Jurors and their verdicts.”Modern Law Review, 208–223.Google Scholar
  23. Simon, R.J. (1967).The Jury and the Defense of Insanity. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
  24. Smith, L.V. (1991). “Impact of pre-trial instruction on Jurors' information processing and decision making.”Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(2), 220–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Straus, M.A. (1979). “Measuring intra-family conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT) Scales.”Journal of Marriage and Family, 41, 75–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sue, S., & Caldwell, C. (1973). “The effects of inadmissible evidence on the decisions of simulated jurors: a moral dilemma.”Journal of Applied Psychology, 345–353.Google Scholar
  27. Villemur, K., Hyde, J.S. (1983). “Effects of sex of defense attorney, sex of jurors, and age and attractiveness of victim on mock juror decision making.”Sex Roles, 9(8), 879–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Visher, C.A. (1987). “Juror decision making: The importance of evidence.”Law and Human Behavior, 11(10), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Police and Criminal Psychology 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Suman Kakar
    • 1
  1. 1.Florida International UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations