factors influencing jury decision making (pack 8)

Question 1

what are the two types of information that jurors may receive for pre-trial publicity?

Answer 1

factual information
emotional information

Question 2

how does pre-trial publicity and schema theory link?

Answer 2

exposure to it means that jurors already have schemas about the criminal case they are involved with because they have factual and emotional knowledge on the case

Question 3

what is the case study for pre-trial publicity?

Answer 3

O.J Simpson

Question 4

what did Fein (1997) study for pre-trial publicity?

Answer 4

real O.J Simpson case and cuttings from newspapers and set up a mock jury to see if it would affect

around 80% said guilty if given pre-trial
only 40% voted guilty if race mentioned in pre trial

Question 5

what did Thomas (2010) study on pre-trial publicity?

Answer 5

analysed 62 real cases
70% remembered pre-trial if high-profile case
11% remembered pre-trial if low-profile

Question 6

what did Ogloff and Vidmar (1994) study on pre-trial publicity?

Answer 6

looked at the effect of television as a form of PTP, in real sexual abuse case child.
concluded that television publicity had more influence than printed media
concerning as TV is 24hrs a day

Question 7

3 strengths of pre-trial publicity as an evaluation factors influencing jury?

Answer 7

psych as a science- lab based experiments back this up, support the ideas

application- 24/7 news channels dangerous and online social media commentary

ethics- tends to use mock juries

Question 8

3 weaknesses of pre-trail publicity as an evaluation factors influencing jury?

Answer 8

ethical issues- ethically constrained

practical issues- low ecological validity, mock jurors do not reflect influence of real pre-trail pub ppts understand they are not on a real jury

reductionism- problem in research, experimental studies must isolate and manipulate the IV ect. oversimplifies the way in which jurors decide guilt

Question 9

what are the four types of characteristics of the D that affect the juries decision?

Answer 9

attractiveness
race
accent
gender

Question 10

what is the social cognition process of stereotyping involve?

Answer 10

noticing something about a person
categorising them to a particular group of people based upon this characteristic
assuming the person has the other characteristics of that group

Question 11

How does the cognitive approach to stereotyping involve

Answer 11

schemas already exist based upon pre trial that influence

Question 12

how does attractiveness of the defendant affect the jury?

Answer 12

research has shown that attractive D’s are threated more leniently than unattractive D’s unless they used their attractiveness to aid their crimes

Question 13

what did Sigall & Osgrove find?

Answer 13

found that more attractive Ds got shorter sentences for burglary than unattractive Ds
but longer for fraud

Question 14

What did Castellow et al (1990) find?

Answer 14

showed that a guilty judgement was most likely when a female secretary was attractive and the male was unattractive.

Question 15

what hypothesis did Abwender and Hough (2001) investigate?

Answer 15

attractive leniency hypothesis

Question 16

what did Abwender and Hough find?

Answer 16

found that female ppt were more lenient towards an attractive female D and less lenient towards unattractive D
Males displayed opposite tendency

Question 17

what were some conclusions from Abwender and Hough?

Answer 17

attractive defendants do not fit the stereotype of a criminal

within our society, physical attractiveness is prized highly in both sexes (halo effect)

Question 18

what is the halo effect?

Answer 18

when our perception of a person we meet is influenced by one positive trait that makes us think positively

Question 19

What did Dion et al discover within the halo effect?

Answer 19

physically attractive people are assumed to have other attractive properties, she gave photos for people to judge.

Question 20

To do with Race, what is believed to be true within jury decision making?

Answer 20

That African Americans are more likely to be found guilty and given the death penalty than white defendants

Question 21

what did Pfeifer and Ogloff (1991) find out to do with race?

Answer 21

white uni students more likely to say that a black D was guilty than a white person in the same crime

Question 22

what did Bradbury and Williams (2013) discover about race?

Answer 22

analysed data from real juries that white jurors were more likely to convict black Ds and so did mostly Hispanic jurors
high % of black jurors less likely to convict black jurors

in group - out group bias

Question 23

what did Skolnick and Shaw find that contradicts previous evidence of race influencing jurors?

Answer 23

whether the jurors were black or white, the black D had less guilty verdicts
may be because of socially desirable answers

Question 24

What did Mahoney and Dixon (1997) find out about accent affecting the juries decisions?

Answer 24

two minute recording of someone with a Brummie accent and someone without

B accent perceived as more guilty

Question 25

what did seggie find out to do with accent?

Answer 25

Study in Australia
standard accent guilty for more white collar crimes fraud
broad accent for more blue collar crimes
petty theft ect

Question 26

3 strengths for the evaluation into the characteristics of the defendant?

Answer 26

there is a lot of evidence for well controlled lab experiments

replicability- high due to standardised

Methodology- psychology as a science, cause and effects links, empirical, scientific credibility

Question 27

3 weaknesses factors that influence the jury?

Answer 27

low internal validity- demand characteristics use of lab experiments, so the validity is threatened, socially desirable answers

low eco validity- mock juries, know their decisions will not have real consequences, mundane realism

generalisability- issues of samples, the partivipants are not real jurors
most of the time they are students

Question 28

alternatives for characteristics of defendant that factors influence jury decision making?

Answer 28

reductionist approach to understanding complex behaviours.