scholarly journals Jury decision-making: the impact of engagement and perceived threat on verdict decisions

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 346-365
Author(s):  
Diane Sivasubramaniam ◽  
Mallory McGuinness ◽  
Darcy Coulter ◽  
Bianca Klettke ◽  
Mark Nolan ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
pp. 612-628
Author(s):  
T. Birch ◽  
I. Birch ◽  
M. James

This study investigated the impact of a defendant’s emotions, expressed through gait and displayed through video footage, on jury decision making. The degree of state empathy and the case-related judgements of the mock jurors were assessed using a questionnaire. The results of the study suggest that the emotions being portrayed by a figure in a piece of video footage can be identified by viewers, and that careful consideration needs to be given to the potential ramifications of playing video footage in court and the subsequent impact on collective jury decision making.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen Reynolds

Previous research has demonstrated that a change in one's alibi is perceived as a sign of guilt. The present study aimed to determine the impact of changing one's initial alibi on ratings of guilt. One hundred and seven participants were randomly assigned to read one of four scenarios (self, police, same, and lied) that described a robbery, a suspect's initial alibi and, in all but the 'same' condition, a modified alibi. An explanation for the change was also provided. It was predicted that both alibi change and the explanation for the change would impact verdict choices. Results revealed that 51% of participants believed that the suspect was guilty regardless of condition. Alibi change predicted more guilty verdicts in the self and lied conditions. Surprisingly, participants who were more trusting were also more likely to convict. The current research contributes to the literature on the importance of alibis as it provides a greater understanding of jury decision making.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen Reynolds

Previous research has demonstrated that a change in one's alibi is perceived as a sign of guilt. The present study aimed to determine the impact of changing one's initial alibi on ratings of guilt. One hundred and seven participants were randomly assigned to read one of four scenarios (self, police, same, and lied) that described a robbery, a suspect's initial alibi and, in all but the 'same' condition, a modified alibi. An explanation for the change was also provided. It was predicted that both alibi change and the explanation for the change would impact verdict choices. Results revealed that 51% of participants believed that the suspect was guilty regardless of condition. Alibi change predicted more guilty verdicts in the self and lied conditions. Surprisingly, participants who were more trusting were also more likely to convict. The current research contributes to the literature on the importance of alibis as it provides a greater understanding of jury decision making.


2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (3) ◽  
pp. 107-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Klea Faniko ◽  
Till Burckhardt ◽  
Oriane Sarrasin ◽  
Fabio Lorenzi-Cioldi ◽  
Siri Øyslebø Sørensen ◽  
...  

Abstract. Two studies carried out among Albanian public-sector employees examined the impact of different types of affirmative action policies (AAPs) on (counter)stereotypical perceptions of women in decision-making positions. Study 1 (N = 178) revealed that participants – especially women – perceived women in decision-making positions as more masculine (i.e., agentic) than feminine (i.e., communal). Study 2 (N = 239) showed that different types of AA had different effects on the attribution of gender stereotypes to AAP beneficiaries: Women benefiting from a quota policy were perceived as being more communal than agentic, while those benefiting from weak preferential treatment were perceived as being more agentic than communal. Furthermore, we examined how the belief that AAPs threaten men’s access to decision-making positions influenced the attribution of these traits to AAP beneficiaries. The results showed that men who reported high levels of perceived threat, as compared to men who reported low levels of perceived threat, attributed more communal than agentic traits to the beneficiaries of quotas. These findings suggest that AAPs may have created a backlash against its beneficiaries by emphasizing gender-stereotypical or counterstereotypical traits. Thus, the framing of AAPs, for instance, as a matter of enhancing organizational performance, in the process of policy making and implementation, may be a crucial tool to countering potential backlash.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document