factors influencing jury decision making

Question 1

who investigated the effects of pre-trial publicity ?

Answer 1

Nancy steblay et al. (2009)

Question 2

how many ppts were in Nancy steblay et al. (2009) ?

Answer 2

5,755

Question 3

what type of study did Nancy steblay et al. (2009) conduct ?

Answer 3

meta-analysis

Question 4

how many studies did Nancy steblay et al. (2009) analyse ?

Answer 4

44

Question 5

what role did the ppts in Nancy steblay et al. (2009) play ?

Answer 5

mock-jurors

Question 6

what was the independent variable of Nancy steblay et al. (2009) ?

Answer 6

whether the mock-jury was fed pre-trial publicity before the trial or not

Question 7

what was the dependent variable of Nancy steblay et al. (2009) ?

Answer 7

the number of jurors who found the defendant guilty or not guilty

Question 8

what were the findings of Nancy steblay et al. (2009) ?

Answer 8

those exposed to pre-trial publicity were significantly more likely to reach a guilty verdict (59%)

Question 9

what percentage of the control group gave a guilty verdict in Nancy steblay et al. (2009) ?

Answer 9

45%

Question 10

name two variables detected in Nancy steblay et al. (2009) that enhanced the effect of pre-trial publicity ?

Answer 10

1) if delay between judgement and pre-trial publicity is larger
2) the type of crime - pre-trial publicity effect was strongest with crimes of murder or sexual assault

Question 11

what belief does the data from Nancy steblay et al. (2009) support ?

Answer 11

it supports the belief that pre-trial publicity leads people to be more likely to reach a guilty judgement, especially when related to certain other conditions like the type of crime

Question 12

based on what was concluded in Nancy steblay et al. (2009), what do researchers suggest as a remedy ?

Answer 12

to hold trails that attract a lot of pre-trail publicity in foreign locations

Question 13

what else can be taken from Nancy steblay et al. (2009), from the cognitive perspective ?

Answer 13

the study offers an explanation for how pre-trial publicity affects jurors - it creates schemas in the minds of the jurors which then become difficult to shift, and then the more publicity there is, the more these schemas become entrenched

Question 14

who investigated the effects of attractiveness in trials ?

Answer 14

abwender and hough (2001)

Question 15

what did abwender and hough (2001) find in terms of females ?

Answer 15

females found the attractive female defendants not guilty and the unattractive female defendants guilty

Question 16

what did abwender and hough (2001) find in terms of males ?

Answer 16

males found the attractive male defendants guilty and unattractive defendants not guilty

Question 17

how many ppts were there in abwender and hough (2001) ?

Answer 17

207 - 129 women and 78 men

Question 18

what was the case that the ppts were asked to give a sentence on in abwender and hough (2001) ?

Answer 18

they were asked to recommend a sentence for an imaginary case of a drunk driver who drove recklessly and killed a pedestrian

Question 19

who investigated the effects of accent in trials ?

Answer 19

Dixon et al. (2002)

Question 20

what did Dixon et al. (2002) investigate ?

Answer 20

they investigated the effect of regional accents on the attribution of guilt in the UK

Question 21

what was the procedure in Dixon et al. (2002) ?

Answer 21

he played a recorded conversation between a male suspect and a male policemen to the ppts

Question 22

how many ppt were there in Dixon et al. (2002) ?

Answer 22

119

Question 23

what was the independent variable of Dixon et al. (2002) ?

Answer 23

whether the ppts heard a Birmingham accent or a ‘standard’ accent

Question 24

what were the findings of Dixon et al. (2002) ?

Answer 24

ratings of guilty were significantly higher in relation to the Birmingham accent - suggesting that accent is another factor that affects jury decision making

Question 25

who investigated the affects of race in trials ?

Answer 25

Bradbury and Williams (2013)

Question 26

what did Bradbury and Williams (2013) do ?

Answer 26

analysed data from real criminal cases

Question 27

what did they find in Bradbury and Williams (2013) ?

Answer 27

found that juries that comprised predominantly of white or hispanic jurors were more likely to convict a black defendant - however, rate of guilty verdict was lower for predominantly hispanic juries, compared to predominantly white juries

Question 28

what factor was found to exacerbate a guilty verdict in Bradbury and Williams (2013)?

Answer 28

when the black defendant was on trial for an illegal drug charge

Question 29

what did pfeifer and ogloff (1991) investigate ?

Answer 29

they also investigated the effect of race in trials

Question 30

what did pfeifer and ogloff (1991) do ?

Answer 30

got ppts to read a transcript of a trial in which the race of the victim and defendant varied

Question 31

what were the ppts of pfeifer and ogloff (1991) asked to do ?

Answer 31

rate the guilt of the defendant

Question 32

what were the findings of pfeifer and ogloff (1991) ?

Answer 32

the results replicated earlier studies which found that ppts overwhelmingly rated black defendants guiltier than white defendants, especially if the victim was white

Question 33

what is a strength of the research used to investigate factors influencing jury decision making ?

Answer 33

it is ethical research

Question 34

what do most studies that investigate factors influencing jury decision and pre-trial publicity making involve ?

Answer 34

they involve mock juries and ‘imaginary’ cases

Question 35

what is the evaluation of using ‘imaginary’ cases and mock juries in this research ?

Answer 35

it may be less ecologically valid - but it does allow researchers to manipulate variables in a way that would not be considered practical or ethical in a real trial

Question 36

what is the exception to the research in this area in terms of using ‘imaginary’ cases and mock juries ?

Answer 36

Bradbury and Williams (2013) used data from real trials - however, it was secondary data and so it did not interfere with the trials (still ethical in that regard) but extra-legal factors could be analysed

Question 37

what is weakness with this research (criticism) ?

Answer 37

other untested factors may influence real juries - although awender and Hough investigated several characteristics of the defendant in their study, there may be other important influences

Question 38

what other untested influences might there be (3) ?

Answer 38

1) whether certain jurors have personal experience of the offence
2) whether there are charismatic leaders within the jury that sway the others’ opinions
3) whether the characteristics of the jurors matchers the characteristics of the defendant (creating greater possibility of empathy)

Question 39

why is it bad not to recognise these possible untested factors ?

Answer 39

because it may limit the usefulness of mock or even real jury research

Question 40

what is another weakness of this research (criticism 2) ?

Answer 40

the results are often inconsistent

Question 41

what is an example of inconsistent results ?

Answer 41

Marc Patry (2008) found that mock jurors who discussed the case were more likely to find the defendant guilty (opposite findings of abwender and hough)

Question 42

what does the opposing evidence of Marc Patry (2008) suggest ?

Answer 42

the effects of attractiveness on the decision-making process may vary depending on other factors, which makes making firm conclusions difficult

Question 43

what is the application of this research ?

Answer 43

it has implications in real criminal trials

Question 44

how can these studies be applied to real-life applications ?

Answer 44

studies underline that jury members are human beings who could be subjected to biases that impact on their neutrality of the verdict

Question 45

how can we take the data from these studies, to improve juror’s neutrality ?

Answer 45

jurors should be reminded by the judge or court officials of the need to remain impartial - not to let extra-legal factors influence their decision

Question 46

what is example of the application ?

Answer 46

in the Pfeifer and Ogloff study, when they told the ppts that they had to find the defendant guilty beyond any reasonable doubt, the racial bias disappeared.

Question 47

therefore, what could these studies do that is helpful to society ?

Answer 47

the knowledge of jury bias may reduce the miscarriages of justice in the future