Pickel Flashcards
what are the different types of inadmissible evidence?
hearsay- includes gossip, speculation and rumour. This kind of evidence might prejudice a jury, doesn’t prove anything
prior convictions- telling a jury about previous convictions may prejudice a jury against you
improper evidence- some ways of gathering information is illegal , like phone tapping or entering someone house without a warrant
what subsection is pickle apart of ?
persuading a jury
what are the other studies in the subsection?
Pennington
hosch
pickel
what did pickel look into?
investigating instructions to disregard inadmissible evidence
what was the first aim?
to look at the effects of prior convictions
what was the second aim?
look at the role of the judges instructions when they were followed by a legal explanations
what was the third aim?
to examine how much the credibility of the witness affects the jurors ability to ignore inadmissible statements
who were the participants ?
256 psychology students from ball state university (part of the course)
what happened during the study?
mock trial , were p/s were assigned to one of the conditions
all p/s listened to an audio recording of fictional trial for theft
what was the design?
independent measures
what happened during the case?
the defendant is accused of stealing $5000 from his supervisors office after being fired from his job at the factory
what is the prosecutors theory?
that the defendant stole the money in order to take revenge for being fired
what did the defendant claim?
he is innocent and both he and his wife testify that he was at home at the time
what happened at one point?
a witness refers to the defendant as having previous convictions for theft
what was the first IV?
the judge overrules the lawyer , deciding this is inadmissible evidence
what was the second IV?
the judge upholds the lawyer and instructs the jury to ignore the evidence of the prior convictions, but offers no further explanation
what was the third IV?
the judge instructs the jury to ignore the evidence and offers an explanation of why it is inadmissible e.g. suggesting it might suggest the defendant has a bad character
what is the fourth IV?
control group- heard the trial without inadmissible evidence
what happened once the p/s heard the case?
filled out a questionnaire asking them for their verdict, their confidence on their verdict and a rating on a 10 point scale measuring how much knowing about the previous convictions made them think the defendant was guilty
what happened to the participants who received no explanation?
thy just ignored the evidence
we know this as they reached the same guilty verdict as control group
what happened to the p/s that heard the explanation ?
didn’t disregard evidence as they reached the opposite verdict to the control group
what evidence was gathered from questionnaire?
none of the p/s believed that evidence about prior convictions had influenced their verdict
there was no significant effect on the use of prior convictions as measured by the scale
what an evaluation point of this study?
drawing attention to the reason for declaring evidence can backfire badley
