PSY 275 EXAM 3
In the study by Kramer et al. (1990), what were the effects of "factual" versus "emotional" pretrial publicity on juror judgments? Make sure you can define what is factual versus emotional publicity.
"Factual" pretrial publicity consisted of news reports detailing the defendant's previous convictions for armed robbery and the discovery of incriminating evidence at his girlfriend's apartment. The "emotional" publicity identified the defendant as a suspect in a hit-and-run killing of a child involving the same motor vehicle used in the robbery. "Emotional" pretrial publicity produced a 20% higher conviction rate than "factual" pretrial publicity, and the effects were even stronger when hung juries were not considered in the analysis
What are some of the assumptions behind believing that the jury deliberation process might be an effective safeguard against pretrial publicity negatively impacting verdicts? (p. 439)
(a) at least one juror will always recognize that the discussion or consideration of pretrial publicity during deliberation is inappropriate and will reprimand others who begin to discuss it, (b) jurors who are reprimanded will disregard any pretrial publicity of which they are aware, and (c) if pretrial publicity is not explicitly discussed by the group, it will not affect the jury verdict (i.e., individual jurors' private opinions, which may have been influenced by pretrial publicity, will not influence the final verdict).
What are some of the factors related to the witness' testimony that could reduce the persuasiveness of their testimony?
(a) excessive use of hedging (e.g., " I think"), (b) overuse of intensifies, (c) hypercorrect speech (i.e., using advanced vocabulary or excessive use of jargon), and (d) use of a questioning intonation with declarative statements. -These tendencies limit the ability of the witness to persuade the audience, and trial consultants can work to make witnesses aware of these tendencies
What were the 6 different types of information the ABA identified that lawyers should not disseminate?
(a) the prior criminal record of the accused; (b) the character or reputation of the accused; (c) the existence of any confession, admission, or statement given by the accused (or the refusal to make a statement); (d) the performance of any examinations or tests (or the refusal to submit to an examination or test); (e) the possibility of a plea of guilty to the offense charged or to a lesser offense; and (f) any opinion as to the accused's guilt or innocence or as to the merits of the evidence in the case
Death Qualified jurors are:
1. more likely to vote guilty during the guilt phase 2. less likely to consider mitigating factors 3. less likely to remember mitigating factors 4. more likely to rate aggravators as important to sentence 5. more likely to hold negative stereotypes toward minorities
In looking at the research on how jurors respond to eyewitness testimony evidence, researchers have examined whether jurors are sensitive to factors such as biased lineup instructions and lineup composition when judging whether to believe the accuracy of the eyewitness and their subsequent verdicts (see Devenport et al., 2002; Devenport and Cutler, 2004). What do the findings indicate?
Although there are some inconsistencies in the findings, overall the estimator and system variables that are related to the accuracy of eyewitness identifications do not reliably influence jurors' judgments of defendant guilt
2 theories suggesting that jurors can't disregard
Brehm Reactance Theory & Wegner (1994)
List some of the common services trial consultants provide.
Community Surveys for Change of Venue Motions, jury selection, trial strategy testing, witness preparation
What are the differences in the attitudes regarding punishment and concern about crime between death qualified juries and juries that are not death qualified?
Death-qualified jurors are more likely than those excluded because of their attitudes toward the death penalty to be prosecution-oriented, more punitive, less trusting of criminal defendants, and more concerned with crime control
One of the findings by Brekke and Borgida (1988) concerned how jurors respond to expert testimony. What impact did expert testimony that linked the scientific evidence to the case in question have?
Expert testimony that appears early rather than later in the trial has greater influence, perhaps because the early presentation provides jurors a framework for understanding the other evidence yet to be presented at trial Expert testimony has a greater impact on juror decisions if the expert concretely links the scientific research to the facts of the case
In the context of PTP (pretrial publicity) effects on juror decisions, what does predecisional distortion mean?
Exposure to prejudicial information about the defendant appears to change the way that jurors process trial evidence, causing them to adopt a proprosecution bias when evaluating the evidence that they hear at trial
How do the heuristic-systematic and the elaboration-likelihood models of persuasion categorize the two routes to persuading people? When listening to an expert witness testify, how might these two routes to persuasion be important to making his or her testimony persuasive to jurors?
H-S: jurors are highly motivated to make a good decision, but they might not always have the ability to evaluate the information in ques- tion, as might be the case with complex evidence like expert testimony, & use heuristics or factors other than the information conveyed in the message to evaluate the message
Wegner (1994)
IRONIC PROCESS OF MENTAL CONTROL: mental control requires monitoring- thought suppression actually increases cognitive activity
What is the difference between informational and normative influence? What effect does the pressure to reach a unanimous decision have on the tendency for jurors to use normative versus informational influence?
If a juror changes her mind through the process of informational influence, the juror adopts a new viewpoint both publicly and pri- vately, changing her beliefs in response to compel- ling information or data communicated by another juror. Thus, change represents a desire to be correct in one's decisions If jurors change their minds because of normative influence, the jurors adopt a new viewpoint publicly, but privately main- tain their previous beliefs. Thus, change in this case represents compliance and a desire to be consistent or harmonious with the group
judicial admonitions
In cases that have received substantial pretrial publicity, the judge may instruct the jurors before deliberation that they should not discuss or consider any of the pretrial publicity during the verdict decision-making process; based on the assumptions that (a) jurors are aware of how pretrial publicity has influenced their opinions about the case and (b) they can intentionally disregard that influence when instructed to do so.
What does the research say about jurors' ability to disregard scientific evidence that has serious flaws? See the research, generally, by McAuliff and Kovera.
Jurors are more likely to discount an expert's research when it is missing a critical control group than when it is not, especially when the jurors are high in "Need for Cognition" and therefore enjoy thinking and reasoning about difficult issues
Do jurors adjust their judgments of the voluntariness of confessions when there are situational pressures to confess (i.e., confession is coerced)?
Jurors often fail to adjust their judgments of the voluntariness of confessions or their verdicts when there are situational pressures on suspects to confess except for when the pressure is applied through threats of physical harm
Are jurors influenced by the confidence of an eyewitness?
Jurors who hear the testimony from a 100% confident witness rate that witness to be more accurate and are more likely to vote to convict the identified defendant than are jurors who hear testimony from a witness who is only 80% confident in the accuracy of the identification
What are the two chief approaches that have been used to study the effects of pretrial publicity on jurors? Summarize the basic approaches
LOOK AT MORE One approach employs field methodology, whereas the other utilizes experimental methodology
What does the research say with regard to 6 versus 12 person juries? Does size matter?
Larger juries tended to delib- erate for longer, recall evidence more accurately, and had more thorough discussions than smaller juries; larger juries were more likely to represent the minority viewpoint and were more diverse than smaller juries
Are judicial instructions an effective safeguard for PTP? Give an overall assessment, and cite some research to support your view.
No. Sue et al. (1974) found that a judge's instructions did little to mitigate the effects of pretrial publicity
Do judicial instructions cure the harmful effects of PTP?
No; as a meta-analysis revealed that jurors also do not follow instructions to disregard inadmissible evidence that is wrongfully presented at trial
With regard to jury composition, and the research by Sommers (2006), how does a diverse jury compare to a more homogenous jury in terms of the quality of the deliberation?
One study showed that juries containing jurors with mixed attitudes toward the death penalty were better at remembering evidence, were more critical of witnesses, and thought the case was more difficult to decide compared to juries containing only death-qualified jurors
How much variability in verdicts can be explained by demographic and attitudinal factors?
Overall, demographic and attitudinal factors account for little variability in verdicts—between 5% and 15% (Hans & Vid- mar, 1982; Hepburn, 1980)
What does the research say about the effectiveness of scientific jury selection? Cite relevant research to support your position.
Research on the effectiveness of scientific jury selection is mixed Horowitz (1980): not found to be any different from conventional methods In a series of studies addressing demographics such as age, race, and gender all were found to be significantly relevant to verdicts but they account for little variability in verdicts
What is the "totality of circumstances" test?
The U.S. Supreme Court currently uses it to assess claims of prejudicial pretrial publicity (Murphy v. Florida, 1975) Under this test, the Court examines the atmosphere of the trial and the voir dire transcript, as well as other "indicia of impartiality" to determine if a defendant did indeed have a fair trial
What are the reasons the authors give behind why the criminal trial jury acquitted OJ Simpson, whereas the civil trial jury found him responsible?
The same conduct led to a murder trial (criminal) and a wrongful death trial (civil). In part because of the different standards of proof, there was not enough evidence for a jury to decide that OJ Simpson was guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt" in the criminal murder case. In the civil trial, however, the jury found enough evidence to conclude that OJ Simpson wrongfully caused his wife's death by a "preponderance of the evidence". all twelve jurors in the Simpson case had to find him guilty of his wife's murder beyond a reasonable doubt, whereas only nine of the twelve jurors on the civil jury had to find that there was more evidence than not
In the study by Otto et al. (1994), what type of pretrial publicity had the strongest effect on verdicts?
The strongest effects were for the negative pretrial publicity about the defendant's character
What does the research say regarding whether a unanimous rule leads to better deliberations than majority rule juries?
Unanimous decision juries were more likely to be evidence-driven, spent more time discussing evidence, and were more likely to use informational influence to persuade fellow jurors than were majority decision juries.
In noting why PTP safeguards often fail, Studebaker and Penrod refer to Wegner's (1989) research on thought suppression. What is the paradoxical effect of asking people to put the PTP information out of their thoughts?
Wegner (1989) found that people find it very difficult to actively suppress a thought upon instruction, particularly when that thought is vivid or emotionally arousing. Indeed, the harder people try to control a thought, the less likely they are to succeed
change of venire
When there has been substantial pretrial publicity about a case, the judge may decide to bring in a jury panel from a locale mat has had less media coverage
Should victim injury severity matter to jurors when they are deciding compensatory damages?
YESSS
amicus curiae brief
a person or group who is not a party to an action, but has a strong interest in the matter, will petition the court for permission to submit a brief in the action with the intent of influencing the court's decision
In what way are the 1st and 6th Amendments at odds with one another with regard to the issue of pretrial publicity?
although some feel that no limitations should be put on the rights of a free press, prejudicial information released by the press could interfere with a defendant's right to a fair trial. Although the free press versus fair trial debate is far from settled, it is clear that the courts and some policymaking groups are aware of the potential problems posed by prejudicial pretrial publicity.
Is cross examination an effective safeguard against poor scientific evidence presented at trial? That is, does cross-examination cause jurors to be more suspicious of poorly conducted research? Find research addressed in the chapter that would support your conclusion
appears to be an ineffective method of sensitizing jurors to methodological problems underlying expert evidence. Jurors who heard expert testimony on the risk that the defen- dant would be dangerous in the future preferred testimony that rested on clinical opinion rather than on an actuarial prediction of risk, despite the stronger scientific basis for the actuarial expert's opinion
aggravating factors
arguing for death sentences
extended voir dire
consists of thorough questioning of potential jurors by attorneys, the judge, or both during the jury selection process. It is based on the assumptions that (a) jurors will report bias or provide responses that are indicative of bias resulting from exposure to pretrial publicity and (b) attorneys and judges can detect bias hi jurors when it is present
Safeguards against the harmful effects of publicity: Identify and explain what each of the safeguards are
continuance, extended voir dire, judicial admonitions, trial evidence, jury deliberation, change of venire, and change of venue
Lockhart v. McCree (1986)
defendant appealed to the US Supreme Court his death penalty conviction APA submitted an amicus curiae brief S.C. argued that venires, not juries, must represent the community, excluding groups based on attitudes was not improper
Review the section on voir dire as a safeguard. Summarize some of the problems with using voir dire to identify and deselect jurors who might hold biases due to pretrial publicity. Are jurors who claim to be impartial actually impartial? Cite some research that would support your position
even if the question was asked and the juror indicated no previous knowledge of the information, one might reasonably ask whether the juror could put the newly acquired information out of mind. The research indicates that most jurors would say, if asked, that they could ignore it when in fact they might not.
Baldus & Woodworth (1983)
found African Americans are nearly 4 times as likely to receive the death penalty
Kassin & Sommers (1997)
found reasons for disregarding evidence matters 1. admissible 2. inadmissible for substantive reasons (unreliable) 3. inadmissible for procedural reasons (exclusionary rule)
Deliberation may reduce the effects of PTP according to suppression theory. Explain how that theory works
if a juror begins to inject information acquired outside the courtroom—for example, through pretrial publicity—then other jurors, particu- larly when they have been instructed to disregard such information by the trial judge, may suppress discussion of this impermissible information and bring the deliberations back to appropriate matters
What is the purpose of compensatory damages?
intended to make plaintiffs whole by compensating them for eco- nomic losses (e.g., medical bills, lost wages) and noneconomic losses (e.g., pain and suffering, loss of companionship)
What are shadow juries and how are they different from mock juries?
involve a sample of participants witnessing the actual trial and reporting their feelings and reactions to the evidence as the trial progresses.
Continuance
involves delaying a trial. It is based on the assumption that effects of pretrial publicity will dissipate over time
What is the purpose behind witness preparation?
involves efforts to improve witness communication skills. It is important to note that the role of the consultant is not to change the evidence provided by the witness but to modify the manner in which the evidence is conveyed to the audience.
jury deliberation
involves group discussion of the evidence by jurors and the determination of a final verdict.
What was the decision in Williams v. Florida (1970) about?
juries in criminal cases could consist of six jurors instead of the traditional 12 jurors. In the ruling, the justices asserted that juries consisting of six members were "functionally equivalent" to juries consisting of 12 members. This decision was later extended to include civil juries (Colgrove v. Battin, 1973) and was limited in Ballew v. Georgia (1978), which held that juries of fewer than six jurors were prohibited
What does the death qualification process involve?
jurors are typically asked during voir dire if their attitudes about the death penalty would interfere with their abilities to follow the law and be impartial in considering the trial evidence Jurors who would not impose the death penalty or who could not fairly consider all the evidence knowing that the defendant could be sentenced to death upon convic- tion are excluded from serving in a capital case; makes jury homogenous
trial evidence
may serve as a prophylactic against the influence of pretrial publicity, for it is possible that jurors can compartmentalize the information they acquire outside the courtroom and isolate it from the evidence they hear in the courtroom. Even if jurors have difficulty doing so, the sheer volume, detail, and pungency of evidence offered in court may swamp any effects of information acquired outside the courtroom
Approximately how many jury trials are conducted in the US each year?
more than a hundred thousand jury trials are held each year in the United States alone, with more than 1.5 million citizens serving as jurors
What are the three stages of deliberation (p. 281)? Explain these three stages
orientation- the jury discusses general procedural and trial issues, elects a foreperson, and begins deliberation open conflict- jurors engage in discussions with the goal of persuading fellow jury members to adopt a particular verdict preference. reconciliation- jurors attempt to ensure the outcome of the deliberation is satisfactory to each member of the jury
Review carefully the study by Moran and Cutler (1991). Were participants who said they could be impartial when deciding the case less likely to believe there was a lot of evidence against the defendant?
participants' knowledge of the case was not inversely correlated with their self-reported ability to be impartial. Regardless of the amount of knowledge about the case, a significant proportion of individuals thought they could be fair and impartial. In fact, the group that most strongly endorsed the proposition that there was "a lot of evidence" against the defendant also had the highest proportion of respondents who thought they could be fair and could set aside the knowledge gleaned from the news
What are implicit personality theories?
preconceptions about how certain traits are related to one another
Sue, Smith, & Caldwell (1973) & Wolf and Montgomery (1977)
presented subject with either control (no evidence), admissible evidence, or inadmissible evidence (instructed to disregard) -found inadmissible group most likely to vote guilty "boomerang effect"-W&M
In studying the effects of racial biases on juror verdicts, what matters more to jurors, the race of the defendant or the race of the victim (i.e., when are racial biases most apparent)? What is some research that would support your answer?
race effects often appear only when the victim of the crime is white (Black defendants were more likely to receive the death penalty in Georgia than were White defendants, but only when their victims were White; when victims were Black, there was no effect of defendant race on sentencing decisions- Baldus et al, 1990)
Brehm Reactance Theory
response to threat to behavioral freedom- will show preference for behavior that is restrained (motivational)
What is the significance of the trial of the Harrisburg Seven?
sparked the increased use of social science methods in litigation in other high-profile cases
In the study by Constantini and King (1980-1981), review carefully what they did in that study, and identify what was the single best predictor of whether or not participants presumed the defendant to be guilty
surveyed jury-eligible adults about their exposure to recent pretrial publicity about either one murder case or a rape case and a different murder case. In addition, respondents were asked questions concerning their general attitudes toward crime and punishment, their social background, and their level of prejudgment about the cases. In each of these cases, Costantini and King found a strong relationship between the amount of informa- tion a participant could supply about a case and the measures of prejudice. Respondents were asked to indicate whether they had formed an opinion about the defendant's guilt in each of the cases. These responses were then correlated with several variables, including gender, educational level, general attitudes about crime, and knowledge about the specific case. by far the best predictor was knowledge about the case—most of which was presumably gained through newspaper and television pretrial publicity
What is the significance of the case Irvin v Dowd (1961)?
the Court held that a defendant could secure a change of venue by demonstrating actual juror prejudice during voir dire. The Court observed that a " 'pattern of deep and bitter prejudice' shown to be present throughout the community . . . was clearly reflected in the sum total of the voir dire examination of a majority of the jurors finally placed in the jury box" (p. 727). The Court was particularly persuaded that, "where so many, so many times, admitted prejudice, such a statement of impartiality can be given little weight" (p.728)—despite the fact that jurors asserted they could be fair and impartial.
What does ad danums mean?
the amount of damages requested by the plaintiff's attorney
Do individual predeliberation juror verdicts predict the final postdeliberation verdicts juries typically reach?
the biggest predictor of postdeliberation verdict is the predelib- eration verdict preferences of the individuals within the jury
What is a major advantage of the jury simulation approach to studying the effects of pretrial publicity?
the control they afford in studying the link between various forms of pretrial publicity and jury decision making
What was the decision Johnson v. Louisiana (1972) about?
the court ruled that a non-unanimous verdict decision was constitutional allowed less-than-unanimous juries to convict defendants in criminal cases in which hard labor is considered as punishment
evidence- driven style
the deliberation initially is centered on reviewing the different pieces of trial evidence, with the jury discussing and agreeing on the evaluation of each piece of evidence. After a thorough discussion of the evidence, jurors discuss the different verdict choices, matching verdict options to the agreed-upon evidence. Jurors may take a straw poll in an evidence-driven jury but usually only late in the process after most evidence has been discussed and agreed upon.
What are the two main categories of individual models of juror decision making? Which category includes the story model for juror decision making?
the mathematical models & the most popular explanation-based model; the story model for juror decision making is an explanation-based
What does "stealing thunder" mean?
the need to disclose negative information about a client to the jury before the other side does
Explain how the story model of juror decision making works, noting the importance of coverage, coherence, and uniqueness.
the process of decision making takes place in three steps: story construction, learning verdict alternatives, and rendering a verdict Coverage refers to the amount of evidence accounted for by a par- ticular story. The greater the coverage, the more likely the story will be chosen and the more confidence a juror will have in that particular story; Story coherence is determined by the consistency, plausibility, and completeness of the story. A consistent story contains neither internal contradictions nor contradictions with evidence the juror believes; If more than one story is deemed high in both coherence and coverage, the uniqueness of either story is com- promised, and jurors' confidence in either story is weakened
mitigating factors
those arguing against death penalty
change of venue
to move the entire trial to another jurisdiction where there has been less pretrial publicity
verdict-driven style
typically begin deliberation by taking an initial straw poll of the individual jurors; After the initial poll establishes which jurors are leaning in either direction, deliberation is then oriented around these preferences, with jurors attempting to use the evidence and their experiences to show support for their verdict preferences and persuade their fellow juror
In civil trials, jurors do not decide guilt—what is it that they decide?
using the standard that something must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence (i.e., more likely than not)
What are the two deliberation styles?
verdict-driven style (quicker)& evidence- driven style
When judging liability, what should matter more to jurors, whether the defendant was careless, or the level of injury the victim experiences?
whether the defendant was careless