Factors affecting jury decision making

Question 1

What did Sigall and Ostgrove investigate>

Answer 1

effect of appearance of jury decision making

Question 2

procedure of sigall and ostgrove

Answer 2

Sample consisted of 120 pps
Card w/ crime written and a photo of Barbara Helms (offender)
6 groups of 20 pps
Barbara Helms was either attractive/ unattractive and had either committed fraud or a burglary
Paper w/o photo was used as a control
IV = attractiveness of offender (barbara)
DV= years sentence given

Question 3

findings of Sigall and Ostgrove

Answer 3

Unattractive burglar received sig. higher sentence than attractive burglar

Attractive received higher sentence for fraud than the unattractive→ pretty women are associated w/ fraud

Question 4

what did Bradbury and Williams investigate?

Answer 4

effect of race on jury decision making

Question 5

Bradbury and williams procedure

Answer 5

AIM→ to investigate if racial composition of jury has an effect of the decision making process
Used secondary data (from Hannaford-Agor et. al)
Analysed trials in 4 states: arizona, washington, california, New york
Only trials w/black defendants used (60%)
Data analysed using logistic regression (only 2 outcomes)
IV= racial makeup of jury (% of white, black, hispanic)
DV= whether trial led to conviction
Control v= quantity of evidence, strength of the case for prosecution US defence, length of trial

Question 6

findings of Bradbury and Williams

Answer 6

RESULTS
Juries w/ higher % of white j→ most likely to convict black def.
Juriew w/ higher % black j → least likely to convict black def.
Juries w/ higher % hispanic j → more likely(less likely than white j)
Black def more likely to get convicted for drug crime than violent crime or crime against property regardless of jury

CONCLUSION
Racial makeup of jury has a sig impact on jury decision making + likelihood of conviction
If def in black→ more likely to get convicted by white/ hispanic jury

Question 7

what did Penrod and Cutler investigate?

Answer 7

effect of expert witness on jury decision making?

Question 8

Penrod and Cutler procedure

Answer 8

Aimed to investigate if presence of an expert witness affected mock juror’s decision making abilities

Procedure:
538 pps all undergraduates
Were shown videotape of robbery
4 INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
Witness identifying condition
Witness confidence
Whether or not expert expressed opinion (high/low)
Form of expert testimony (descriptive/statistical)
Completes questionnaire containing DVs:
Guilty/not guilty
How confident are you?
Memory of trial and expert testimony

Question 9

Penrod and Cutler findings

Answer 9

Results:
Jurors gave more guilty verdict when witness ID was good (inc w/ descriptive lang.)
Jurors more confident in good witness identifying conditions
Jurors more confident when witness 100% confident

	   Conclusion: Expert testimony improved juror’s knowledge  Expert made jury pay more attention Expert did not affect verdict