Negative Emotions Felt During Trial: the Effect of Fear,Anger, and Sadness on Juror Decision Making

During trial, jurors may experience a variety of emotions, many of which are negative. The current study examined the effects the negative emotions anger, fear, and sadness had on jurors' sentencing decisions and explored whether the cognitive appraisal theory or the intuitive prosecutor model could explain these effects. Jurors viewed the sentencing phase of a capital murder trial and were asked to sentence the defendant. Results indicated that after viewing the trial, jurors reported increased anger and sadness, but not fear. However, only change in anger affected jurors' sentences. Jurors who reported a greater change in anger were more likely to sentence the defendant to death. This effect was mediated by the level of importance that jurors placed on the prosecution's evidence and argument. Consistent with the intuitive prosecutor model, increased anger led to higher ratings of the importance of the aggravating evidence and an increase in death sentences. Implications are discussed. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Jurors' Views on the Value and Objectivity of Mental Health Experts Testifying in Sexually Violent Predator Trials

Although psychologists and psychiatrists often testify in court, we know relatively little about the extent to which jurors value the testimony they hear from these experts. We surveyed 161 jurors who rendered opinions in 14 sex offender civil commitment trials after hearing testimony from psychologists and psychiatrists serving as expert witnesses. Most jurors reported that the experts they heard testify were honest, and they tended to attribute disagreements among experts to case complexity, as opposed to adversarial allegiance or bias. Most reported that hearing from the experts helped them make better decisions and that experts using risk assessment instruments could make more accurate predictions than those who did not. Jurors were, however, more skeptical about the ability of experts to accurately predict recidivism when they heard testimony from both prosecution and defense experts. Findings suggest that jurors value risk assessment testimony from experts, but that experts must think carefully about how to best make risk assessment instrument results accessible to jurors. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Effects of prior juror experience on jury sentencing

The effect of prior juror service on jury sentencing was investigated in an archival study of 143 criminal trials resulting in convictions. Trials took place over two calendar years in a state circuit court requiring jurors to serve 30-day terms. Jurors sentenced defendants in each case according to a set of guidelines determined by trial judges. The severity of the sentences imposed by jurors was rated by 101 subjects on a scale of 1 (least severe) to 100 (most severe). The results indicated that the more experienced juries gave significantly more severe sentences than did the less experienced juries. This finding was unchanged when civil court experience was considered in addition to criminal court experience. Possible interpretations of these results are discussed.     

The impact of note taking style and note availability at retrieval on mock jurors’ recall and recognition of trial information

Jurors forget critical trial information and what they do recall can be inaccurate. Jurors’ recall of trial information can be enhanced by permitting them to take notes during a trial onto blank sheets of paper (henceforth called freestyle note taking). A recent innovation is the trial-ordered-notebook (TON) for jurors, which is a notebook containing headings outlining the trial proceedings and which has space beneath each heading for notes. In a direct comparison, TON note takers recalled more trial information than freestyle note takers. This study investigated whether or not note taking improves recall as a result of enhanced encoding or as a result of note access at retrieval. To assess this, mock jurors watched and freely recalled a trial video with one-fifth taking no notes, two-fifths taking freestyle notes and two-fifths using TONs. During retrieval, half of the freestyle and TON note takers could access their notes. Note taking enhanced recall, with the freestyle note takers and TON note takers without note access performing equally as well. Note taking therefore enhances encoding. Recall was greatest for the TON note takers with note access, suggesting a retrieval enhancement unique to this condition. The theoretical and applied implications of these findings are discussed.     

Juror Perceptions in a Rape Trial: Examining the Complainant's Ingestion of Chemical Substances Prior to Sexual Assault

This study examined the impact of a rape complainant's willingness to ingest a chemical substance and the type of ingested substance on the decisions of 229 mock jurors. Jurors were influenced by the type of substance used by the complainant, the complainant's willingness to use a substance, and rape myths. The complainant's ingestion of alcohol (compared to gamma-hydroxybutrate [GHB] and marijuana) led to the highest guilt ratings for the defendant. The complainant who willingly ingested a substance was viewed as less credible and more to blame for the rape compared to one who unwillingly used a substance. The complainant was perceived as the most credible when she unwillingly ingested GHB or marijuana. Jurors high in rape myth acceptance gave lower ratings of guilt to the defendant compared to jurors with lower rape myth acceptance. Overall, the results highlight several juror and case factors that might bias jurors in actual rape trials.     

Jurors Report that Risk Measure Scores Matter in Sexually Violent Predator Trials,but that Other Factors Matter More

After deliberating to a verdict, jurors (N = 462) from 40 sexually violent predator (SVP) trials completed a questionnaire asking them to rate the extent to which risk measure scores, diagnoses, expert witness testimony, and offender characteristics described during the trials influenced their commitment decisions. Jurors reported that offenders' sexual offending history, failure to change, and lack of remorse had the strongest influence on their commitment decisions. They reported that testimony about risk instrument scores (e.g., Static-99) and psychopathy had less influence on their decisions, but those who did report being influenced by instrument results were especially likely to view the offender as being at a high risk for reoffending. Overall, findings suggest that SVP jurors view risk measure results as important, but not as important as other offender, offense, and testimony characteristics, including some that have limited relevance to recidivism risk. Thus, findings also suggest that experts may need to better educate jurors regarding factors that do and do not relate to recidivism risk. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Effects of physical attractiveness on evaluations of a male employee's allegation of sexual harassment by his female employer

College students (N = 324) served as mock jurors in a simulated civil case in which a male plaintiff accused a female defendant of sexual harassment. The authors experimentally manipulated the physical attractiveness of the litigants. The authors asked mock jurors to decide whether the defendant was guilty and to rate their certainty of belief in the defendant's guilt (or lack of guilt). Jurors were more certain of the guilt of the defendant when the plaintiff was attractive than when he was unattractive. Plaintiff attractiveness significantly affected female jurors' individual recommended verdicts when the defendant was unattractive but not when she was attractive. With male jurors, plaintiff attractiveness significantly affected their verdicts when the defendant was attractive but not when she was unattractive. Female jurors were more likely than male jurors to conclude that sexual harassment had taken place but only when the litigants were different in attractiveness.     

The effects of defendant conduct on jury damage awards

Laws of negligence dictate that jurors' decisions about damages be influenced by the severity of plaintiffs' injuries and not by the reprehensibility of defendants' conduct. The authors simulated an automobile negligence trial to assess whether jurors' decisions are in accord with those expectations. Conduct of the defendant and severity of the plaintiff's injuries were manipulated. Jurors listened to the evidence, completed predeliberation questionnaires, deliberated as a jury, and completed postdeliberation questionnaires. Severity of the plaintiff's injury had a strong impact on damage awards, but evidence related to the defendant's conduct was also influential, particularly when the plaintiffs injuries were mild. Here, jurors with any conduct-related evidence gave larger damage awards than jurors with no conduct-related evidence. Findings suggest an effect of defendant conduct on damage awards that may be mediated by judgments that the defendant was negligent.     

What's Fair When a Child Testifies?1

Undergraduates (N = 385) watched a 2-hr, videotaped, mock trial of a child sexual abuse case. The child testified in open court, with a barrier between the child and the defendant, or via closed circuit television. Students enacted the role of a juror, sibling of the defendant, or sibling of the mother of the victim. The judge either did or did not warn jurors that the barrier or video should not be considered evidence of the defendant's guilt. Use of the barrier or video did not influence guilty votes, the credibility of witnesses, nor the perceived fairness of the trial for jurors. Siblings of the defendant perceived these procedures to be biased and their use as unfair. Increased publicity about the use of barriers and closed-circuit television when children testify is recommended to reduce objections to these procedures.     

Postnatal debriefing: have we thrown the baby out with the bath water?

Postnatal debriefing is offered by 78% of maternity services in the UK despite little evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that it is effective. RCTs in this area have applied debriefing as a prophylactic to all or high risk women, rather than as a treatment for women who request it. This pragmatic trial therefore evaluated existing postnatal debriefing services that provide debriefing as a treatment for women who request it. Forty-six women who met criterion A for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and requested debriefing 1.3–72.2 months (median 16 weeks) postpartum completed measures of depression, PTSD, support and negative appraisals of the birth before and one month after debriefing. Women were compared with others who gave birth in the same hospitals during the same time period (n = 34), who met criterion A for PTSD but had not requested debriefing. Results showed PTSD symptoms reduced over time in both groups but greater decreases were observed in women who attended debriefing. Debriefing also led to reduction in negative appraisals but did not affect symptoms of depression. Therefore, results suggest providing debriefing as a treatment to women who request or are referred to it may help to reduce symptoms of PTSD.     

Effect of viewing the interview and identification process on juror perceptions of eyewitness accuracy

This study examined whether showing jurors a video of the witness's initial attempts to describe and identify the perpetrator would facilitate jurors' ability to discriminate between accurate and inaccurate witnesses. Mock jurors observed a simulated trial in which the key witness testified under direct examination and cross‐examination. The jurors saw either the witness's testimony or the witness's testimony plus videotape footage of the earlier police interviews in which the witness described and attempted to identify the perpetrator. Results support the hypothesis: Jurors in the examination‐plus‐video condition discriminated between accurate and inaccurate witnesses better than jurors in the examination‐only condition. We discuss various mechanisms to explain the advantage provided by the video. It is recommended that police officers videotape the line‐up procedure and that jurors be shown this video at trial. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Note Taking and Note Reviewing Enhance Jurors' Recall of Trial Information

Jurors forget critical trial information and this can influence their verdicts. This study assessed (1) whether or not note taking during a trial improves mock jurors' recall of trial information and (2) whether or not reviewing these notes prior to recalling the trial offers any additional enhancement. Mock jurors first watched a trial video. Three‐quarters were permitted to take notes whilst watching it. One‐third of these mock jurors then reviewed their notes, one‐third mentally reviewed the trial only, and one‐third completed a filler task to prevent any form of reviewing. The remainder took no notes during the trial and also completed a filler task afterwards. All then had their memory of the trial assessed via free recall. The principal findings were (1) note taking enhanced recall of the trial and (2) note reviewing offered an additional recall enhancement. The applied implications of these findings are discussed.Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Juror Need for Cognition and Sensitivity to Methodological Flaws in Expert Evidence1

This study examined whether need for cognition (NC) moderated jurors' sensitivity to methodological flaws in expert evidence. Jurors read a sexual harassment trial summary in which the plaintiff's expert presented a study that varied in ecological validity, general acceptance, and internal validity. High NC jurors found the defendant liable more often and evaluated expert evidence quality more favorably when the expert's study was internally valid vs. missing a control group; low NC jurors did not. Ecological validity and general acceptance did not affect jurors' judgments. Ratings of expert and plaintiff credibility, plaintiff trustworthiness, and expert evidence quality were positively correlated with verdict. Theoretical implications for the scientific reasoning literature and practical implications for trials containing psychological science are discussed.     

Judging jury service: results of the North Carolina administrative office of the courts juror survey

This study examined venirepersons' and jurors' levels of satisfaction with jury service. Surveys were distributed to all persons who reported for state court jury service during two one-week periods in each North Carolina county. Questions concerned satisfaction with various aspects of jury service, the effects of service, hardships experienced, details of and reactions to cases heard, and basic demographic information. Responses were obtained from 82 of the 100 counties and 4,654 venirepersons (of whom 1,478 served as jurors). Consistent with prior research on juror experiences, results generally revealed high levels of satisfaction and positive opinions about various aspects of jury service. Service did not influence opinions about the courts for most respondents, and those whose opinions changed tended to become more positive about jury service. Suggestions for future research emphasize giving higher priority to publishing unpublished research on jury experience, explaining the high satisfaction levels observed in samples of jurors, and examining the impact of trial reform on juror satisfaction levels.     

Jury Panel Member Perceptions of Interpersonal‐Affective Traits of Psychopathy Predict Support for Execution in a Capital Murder Trial Simulation

Recent research with college undergraduate mock jurors suggests that how psychopathic they perceive a criminal defendant to be is a powerful predictor of whether they will support a death verdict in simulated capital murder trials. Perceived affective and interpersonal traits of psychopathy are especially predictive of support for capital punishment, with perceived remorselessness explaining a disproportionate amount of variance in these attitudes. The present study attempted to extend these findings with a more representative sample of community members called for jury duty (N = 304). Jurors reviewed a case vignette based on an actual capital murder trial, provided sentencing verdicts, and rated the defendant on several characteristics historically associated with the construct of psychopathy. Consistent with prior findings, remorselessness predicted death verdicts, as did the affective and interpersonal features of psychopathy – though the latter effect was more pronounced among jurors who were Caucasian and/or who described their political beliefs as moderate rather than conservative or liberal. Results are discussed in terms of the potentially stigmatizing effects of psychopathy evidence in capital cases. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Enhancing Juror Competence in a Complex Trial

This study examined the effects of providing substantive, case-related, judicial instructions before presentation of evidence and permitting jurors to take notes, on verdicts and cognitive performance in a complex civil trial. Jurors made compensatory awards when the evidence either strongly or modestly favored the plaintiffs. One hundred and twenty jury-eligible participants saw a videotape of a cognitively dense trial involving multiple plaintiffs. Notetakers, while showing superior cognitive performance over non-notetakers, were more effective decision makers when pre-instructed and facing less ambiguous evidence. Results indicated that notetaking when jurors are pre-instructed enhanced recall of probative evidence and resulted in fewer non-probabitive intrusions, which facilitated decision making on legally appropriate grounds. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Videotaped Versus In-Court Witness Testimony: Does Protecting the Child Witness Jeopardize Due Process?1

Videotaping depositions may protect a child witness from the stress of testifying in court but also may influence jurors’ perceptions of the child and the defendant, and jurors’ verdicts in systematic ways. The present study examines several psychological hypotheses that emerge from the controversy over the use of videotaped depositions of child witnesses in child sexual abuse trials. We predicted that student jurors viewing a videotaped deposition would be more proprosecution and less prodefense than those who did not receive testimony in such a form. Thus, it was predicted that jurors viewing a videotaped deposition would perceive the prosecution witnesses and their testimonies more favorably, the defense witnesses and their testimonies less favorably, and give more guilty verdicts than jurors who viewed identical testimony during the course of a trial. We also predicted that females would be more proprosecution and less prodefense than males and that this gender difference would be accentuated by the medium of presentation. The medium of presentation had only a few effects on jurors’ responses. However, when differences emerged, they generally provided support for the predicted main effects. The implications of these findings for the use of videotaped depositions of child sexual abuse victims are discussed.