Racial Bias in Juridic Judgment at Private and Public Levels

Mock jurors (college students and prospective jurors) made individual decisions regarding liability and damages (before and after deliberation) in response to a case of sexual harassment. There were no significant differences in damage awards from college students and prospective jurors. There was evidence of racial bias among White mock jurors against plaintiffs who accused a Black supervisor of sexual harassment: Lower damages were recommended for plaintiffs who accepted an offer to meet for drinks in a Black supervisor's room than for plaintiffs who accepted the same offer from a White supervisor. There was also evidence of racial bias among White mock jurors against Black plaintiffs: Lower damages were recommended for Black plaintiffs than for White plaintiffs. These effects were present in the individual judgments of college students and prospective jurors. However, these forms of racial bias did not carry over into the decisions made by juries comprised of college students or prospective jurors. Subtle racial biases operating primarily at a subconscious level may get washed out in the complex task of coming to agreement on an appropriate award. The effects of manipulated variables on damage awards probably are overestimated in general in mock juror studies that do not examine group verdicts.     

The effects of jury size, evidence complexity, and note taking on jury process and performance in a civil trial

A total of 567 jury-eligible men and women who were assigned to 6- or 12-person juries saw a videotaped civil trial that contained either I or 4 plaintiffs. Half the juries took notes, whereas the remainder did not. Six-person juries that did not take notes awarded multiple plaintiffs the highest amounts of compensation. Six-person juries also gave the highest punitive damages when they did not take notes and judged multiple plaintiffs. The punitive awards of 6-person juries were highly variable compared with 12-person juries. Multiple plaintiffs also increased the unpredictability of jury punitive awards. Twelve-person juries deliberated longer, recalled more probative information, and relied less than 6-person juries on evaluative statements and nonprobative evidence. Limitations and implications are discussed.     

Avoiding Type II error in assessing lead toxicity plaintiffs

This article discusses statistical parallels between excessive conservatism and insufficient conservatism in rendering forensic opinions. The elements of a tort are reviewed and their relation to psychological and psychiatric opinions is also discussed, as are psychometric and clinical approaches to assessment of impairment and causation in individual lead poisoned children. It is argued that assessments in lead poisoning cases consisting solely of cranial nerve examinations result in considerable Type II Error. Sources of Type II Error in research using analysis of covariance techniques to study the toxic effects of lead include variance stealing, use of excessive numbers of covariates, lack of attention to interactions, and use of covariates that are actually substitute measures of lead ingestion. When experts cite nonsignificant findings of studies of low-level lead exposure, it inappropriately negates lead effects in more severely lead poisoned plaintiffs. In true experimental studies where there is no ambiguity regarding causation, the destructive effects of lead are quite clear. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Effects of Victim,Defendant, and Juror Gender on Decisions in Child Sexual Assault Cases1

We examined the combined influence of juror, victim, and defendant gender on jurors’ decisions in child sexual abuse cases. Mock jurors read scenarios of an assault case involving a man or woman defendant accused of molesting a 15‐year‐old boy or girl. Jurors then rendered verdicts and rated the defendant's and victim's believability and responsibility for the abuse. Female jurors were generally more pro‐victim in case judgments than were male jurors. Additionally, a woman perpetrator was evaluated more leniently than was a man perpetrator, especially by male jurors when the victim was a boy. Case judgments were unrelated to jurors’ social conservatism, sexism, or attitudes toward homosexuality. Results have implications for understanding social perceptions of mixed‐ and same‐gender abuse involving adolescent victims, and juror decision making in man‐ and woman‐perpetrated child sexual assault cases.     

Factors influencing juror verdict in a case involving repressed memories of abuse

Mental health professionals acting as expert witnesses are expected to testify about the prevalence of sexual abuse, and also about the veracity of memory. In cases involving adult survivors of sexual abuse, this testimony is typically about repressed and false memory syndromes. Many professionals have noted concerns about the lack of definitive data to support either syndrome. This study examined the following variables: juror knowledge and experience with repressed and false memory syndromes, juror attitudes about sexual abuse and memory recovery techniques, and gender of juror on verdict. Results include effects for repressed memory knowledge/experience and gender. Gender differences were found regarding attitudes about abuse and memory. Concluding comments include practical and research implications of the study results.     

Factors influencing juror verdict in a case involving repressed memories of abuse

Mental health professionals acting as expert witnesses are expected to testify about the prevalence of sexual abuse, and also about the veracity of memory. In cases involving adult survivors of sexual abuse, this testimony is typically about repressed and false memory syndromes. Many professionals have noted concerns about the lack of definitive data to support either syndrome. This study examined the following variables: juror knowledge and experience with repressed and false memory syndromes, juror attitudes about sexual abuse and memory recovery techniques, and gender of juror on verdict. Results include effects for repressed memory knowledge/experience and gender. Gender differences were found regarding attitudes about abuse and memory. Concluding comments include practical and research implications of the study results.     

Beliefs about factors affecting the Reliability of eyewitness testimony: A Comparison of judges,jurors and the general public

We surveyed 164 members of the juror pool of the Court of Appeal and a representative sample of 1000 adult Norwegians without juror experience, about their knowledge and beliefs about eyewitness testimony, and compared their answers to a prior survey of Norwegian judges. Although the judges were somewhat more knowledgeable than jurors and the general public, all groups had limited knowledge of eyewitness testimony. Juror experience, in terms of number of times serving as juror, did not correlate with eyewitness knowledge. Consistent with this finding, the knowledge scores of the jurors were similar to the scores of the general public, tested with an abridged seven‐item version of the questionnaire. Comparisons with the results of surveys conducted in the US, indicate similar levels of knowledge among law professionals and jurors in the two countries. Increasing the knowledge of eyewitness testimony among the principal participants in the judiciary system may be an important component of the solution to eyewitness error. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Stranger at the gate: the effect of the plaintiff's use of an interpreter on juror decision-making

There exists a substantial literature examining the effect on juror decision-making of extraneous demographic characteristics of plaintiffs and defendants. In most of these studies, members of groups that are perceived as being minorities or as belonging to one of a variety of outgroups (lower socioeconomic status, immigrants) are treated more harshly by jurors, or are perceived as being less deserving or credible. In this study, the authors examine treatment by jurors of a relatively less well investigated outgroup: that of the non-English speaker. An experiment was conducted in which actual jurors in a large urban county were randomly assigned to view a videotape of a civil case. Three versions of the videotapes were identical except that, on one, the plaintiff required an interpreter to communicate and it is approximately three minutes longer than the other two. On the other two versions, the plaintiff spoke English, but differed in ethnicity (Hispanic or Anglo). The findings showed that the non-English-speaking plaintiff did not fare worse than the English speakers, and, in fact, was awarded higher mean damages than either of the English speakers.     

How type of excuse defense, mock juror age, and defendant age affect mock jurors' decisions

The authors investigated the effects of mock juror age (younger vs. older), defendant age (22 vs. 65), and type of excuse defense used by defendants (a highly self-inflicted condition, Cocaine Dependency Disorder, vs. a less self-inflicted condition, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder) on mock juror decisions. Ninety-six younger and 96 older adults read a scenario and answered a questionnaire. Results indicated that the defendant using the highly self-inflicted excuse was more likely to receive a guilty verdict and a longer sentence than was the defendant using the less self-inflicted excuse. Older jurors were more certain of their verdicts and saw the defendant as more responsible for his condition than did younger jurors. Defendant age did not affect juror decisions. In addition, excuse type and juror age affected the jurors' perceptions of the victim's responsibility for the attack. The authors discuss the potential influence of juror age on perceptions of defendant responsibility.     

Effects of Victim and Defendant Race on Jurors' Decisions in Child Sexual Abuse Cases1

We examined the influence of victim and defendant race, victim age, juror gender, and juror prejudice on jurors' decisions in child sexual abuse cases. In Experiments 1 and 2, mock jurors judged Black and Hispanic child victims to be more responsible for their sexual abuse than White victims. In Experiment 2, jurors assigned more guilt to defendants in cases involving victims and perpetrators of the same race compared to different races. Experiment 3 illustrated that laypeople believe same‐race cases to be more plausible generally. Experiment 2 revealed that high‐prejudiced White mock jurors made no more racially biased judgments than low‐prejudiced mock jurors. Finally, women were generally more pro‐victim in their case judgments than were men, and older victims were disadvantaged compared to younger victims in terms of perceived credibility and responsibility, and their cases were less likely to draw convictions.     

How reason for surgery and patient weight affect verdicts and perceptions in medical malpractice trials: a comparison of students and jurors

Jurors' decision-making processes are often influenced by extra-legal factors, including judgments of defendants and plaintiffs. Two studies comparing the decisions of university students with those of community jurors sought to determine if extra-legal factors such as individual differences (including identity as a student or juror participant), the reason for surgery (medically necessary vs. elective), the type of surgery (e.g., gastric bypass, nasal reconstruction) or weight of the patient influenced jurors' decisions and perceptions in medical malpractice suits, such that participants would hold negative perceptions of overweight patients or patients who undergo elective surgeries. Results indicate that students and jurors differ in perceptions of the patient's injury and perceptions of risk, which explains some of the variance in liability verdicts. Students were more likely to find doctors liable, but also were more likely to assign responsibility to patients than were jurors. Patients who had undergone elective surgery were seen as more responsible for their situation - and their doctors were assigned less responsibility - than those who had undergone a medically necessary surgery. Tests of weight bias showed that jurors found overweight patients less responsible for their situation than patients of normal weight, but students showed the opposite pattern. Theoretical explanations are explored and implications discussed.     

Effects of a Visual Technology on Mock Juror Decision Making

Two studies explored the effects of lawyers' use of PowerPoint on liability judgments in a case involving statistical evidence. Participants (Study 1, N = 192; Study 2A, N = 180; Study 2B, N = 189) watched videotaped opening statements for plaintiffs and defendant. In general, defendant's responsibility was judged to be greater when plaintiffs used PowerPoint slides than when they did not and less when defendant used PowerPoint slides than when it did not. Furthermore, PowerPoint's impact was greatest when its use was unequal. PowerPoint enhanced persuasion partly through central and partly through peripheral processing. In general, each party's use of PowerPoint increased participants' recall of that party's evidence, which in turn increased defendant's judged responsibility (when plaintiffs used PowerPoint) or reduced it (when defendants used PowerPoint), indicative of central processing. PowerPoint also functioned as a peripheral cue, influencing participants' judgments of defendant's responsibility by affecting their perceptions of the respective attorneys. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Effects of Demand Characteristics,Evaluation Anxiety,and Expectancy on Juror Honesty During Voir Dire

This study makes use of the basic experimental research on the social psychology of experiments in understanding the jury-selection process. A survey asked ex-jurors to report on their experiences during jury selection. The ex-jurors reported on the factors that influenced the honesty of their responses during voir dire. The findings were consistent with previous laboratory results, with evaluation anxiety producing the most significant changes in juror honesty. However, both evaluation anxiety and demand characteristics influenced juror behavior depending on the motives of the juror. Expectancies of judges and lawyers appeared to have little effect on the reported honesty of ex-jurors.     

Evaluating Gender Discrimination Claims: Is There a Gender Similarity Bias?

A rich literature exists that examines individuals' perceptions of affirmative action in organizations. However, little is known regarding the evaluation of reverse gender discrimination claims arising from gender-based preferential treatment. This study investigated the possible existence of a gender similarity bias in evaluations of gender discrimination allegations using a laboratory experiment in which the strength of evidence against the defendant company and the gender of the plaintiff were manipulated. Our sample consisted of 120 undergraduate students (60 men, 60 women) from diverse racial/ethnic groups (35% Asian, 6% African American, 18% Hispanic, and 41% Caucasian). Results suggested that female mock jurors favored female plaintiffs over male plaintiffs. In contrast, there were no gender-related differences in perceptions of male plaintiffs. Thus, although women did not disadvantage male plaintiffs, there was a tendency for them to be favorably biased in favor of female plaintiffs. As expected, this tendency was greatest under conditions of evidential uncertainty about the company's guilt.     

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.     

Chances, Individuals and Toxic Torts

We currently live in a world of silent risks caused by invisible agents acting through mechanisms poorly understood. It is not surprising that the resulting harms have led to litigation. Playing a visible role in all these cases is the 'causation problem'; plaintiffs face sometimes insurmountable hurdles in providing evidence for causation. However, the fact that mechanisms are hidden does not mean that one cannot have reliable evidence and information about them.
In this paper I argue that the law has taken an ill-founded, skeptical stance towards statistical evidence for causation in toxic tort cases, making the task of plaintiffs unjustly difficult. I address two frequently cited skeptical claims about statistical evidence and argue that they are unfounded as applied in tort law. I conclude that the skeptical stance results from a failure to distinguish physical chances from epistemic probabilities, and that such a distinction is necessary if plaintiffs are to have a chance of prevailing.     

Child‐Witness and Defendant Credibility: Child Evidence Presentation Mode and Judicial Instructions1

Child‐witness presentation mode, judicial instructions, and deliberation stage effects on juror ratings of child witness and defendant were investigated Perceptions of the impact of presentation mode on witnesses, juror task, and justice also were explored. Participants (N= 108) viewed a simulated child sexual abuse trial videotape. Overall child‐witness credibility was significantly more positive with videodeposition or court‐given child evidence than with videolink. The defendant was seen as more definitely guilty when child testimony was court given than by videodeposition or videolink. Presentation mode also significantly influenced perceived impact on child witness, defendant case, and juror task. Judicial instructions interacted with presentation mode to affect perceptions of impact on child witness and juror task. Findings are discussed in relation to previous research, and implications for future research and practice are outlined.     

Counterfactual thinking in mock juror assessments of negligence: A preliminary investigation

This Research Report presents an initial attempt to apply the theory of counterfactual thinking to study the cognitive processes that underlie judgments of negligence. Subjects reviewed a summary of an appellate case involving a work accident and listed all the ways in which the accident could have been undone (mutated). Participants' evaluations of the defendant's behavior were influenced by the ease of mutation of the negligent act and other mutations of the defendant's behavior, but not by the number of mutations of the plaintiffs conduct. Exploratory path analysis suggested that counterfactual thinking may have its greatest impact not as a direct influence on verdicts and damages, but rather as an indirect influence impacting verdicts through lower level judgments about the normality of the defendant's behavior and the standard of care. The results also suggest that contrary to the law, subjects base their negligence verdicts on assessments of normal care along with due care.     

Community members' perceptions of evidence: the effects of gender in a recovered memory civil trial.

Community members judged a civil trial in which a memory had either been recovered or kept secret until therapy 12 years later. Female jurors were more likely to find the defendant liable and to compensate female plaintiffs more than male plaintiffs, whereas the reverse pattern held for male jurors. Female plaintiffs who reported recovered memories were compensated least, whereas female plaintiffs who kept the abuse secret were compensated most. A mediational model was posited and results indicated that the origin of the memory of sexual abuse and victim gender influenced assessments of trial testimonies that were related to the trial outcomes. Results supported the postulated model and indicated significant juror-gender differences in evaluating and weighing the evidence.     

"Recipe for a Jury" Revisited: A Balance Theory Prediction

This study examined the relationship of three variables to verdict confidence in an experimental simulation of the jury deliberation process. The three variables were: sex of juror, verdict (guilty or innocent), and the similarity or dissimilarity between juror and confederate verdicts (congruence or incongruence). The subjects were 35 male and 37 female college students. They deliberated in groups containing a male confederate who role-played an obnoxious anti-White or anti-Black juror. Results indicated that before deliberation, male and guilt verdict jurors were more confident than females and innocent verdict jurors. After deliberation, however, sex differences in verdict confidence were absent while innocent verdicts jurors were more confident than guilt verdict jurors. Most important, as predicted from Heider's Balance Theory, males who deliberated with a confederate whose verdict was congruent with theirs' became less confident in their verdicts. Unexpectedly, females became more confident. The study's major hypothesis, then, that it may be advantageous for the defense to accept a juror who zealously advocates a guilty verdict, was only supported for males.