Judges, Juries, and Justice WYS

Story Telling Model (STM)

Schema that changes interpretation of evidence and provides assumptions. “Violent bully who menaces local strangers in a bar. Grossly disproportionate weight in trial.

Vivid Persuasion

Emotionally Interesting

Concrete and Imagery Provoking

Proximate in a sensory, temporal, or spatial way

ELABORATIVE, VISUAL DETAIL THAT ADDS NO SUBSTANCE TO THE CASE...
EXCEPT TO HELP YOU PICTURE IT EASIER

Pallid

“[defendant] staggered against a
serving table, knocking a bowl to the
floor.”

Vivid

“…Bowl of guacamole dip to the floor, splattering guacamole all of the white shag carpet”

What is more persuasive in court? Pallid or Vivid?

Vivid is more persuasive in court as it engages the senses and emotions, making the scenario more relatable and impactful for the jury.

Trivial Persuasion

Peripheral details that are irrelevant to the case itself. May be vivid but not in a manner relevant for legal judgement.

Results of Prosecution Condition

Greater guilt ratings. Subjects inferred that an eyewitness who gave testimony with greater detail had better memory for the trivial details and the culprit than an eyewitness who gave testimony with lesser degree of detail.

Eyewitness

Eyewitness memory for peripheral details overall can be negatively related to eyewitness memory for the culprit. Witnesses who are better at identification have been shown to have poorer memory for peripheral details.

Gruesome

emotionally evocative and increase emotional biases in legal decision -making. The results indicate that the presence of gruesome photographs increases the number of affirmative jury decisions.

Honesty

Babyface adults are percieved to have childlike qualities. Facial stereotyping. Large, round eyes. Short nose, small chin, soft features.

Assumption of Naivety

“Of course babies would mess up…”

More likely to be found guilty of negligent maintenance of records.

Assumption of Honesty

“Of course babies would not lie…”

Less likely to be found guilty of deliberate falsification of records.

Salerno & Bottoms, 2009

In legal decision making, emotions are predicted to be problematic and prejudicial by yielding increased punitive judgements

Pretrial Publicity

Juror bias can be created through EXTRALEGAL means.

Confusing because the first amendment guarantees freedom of the press to publicize, but the sixth amendment guarantees right to a fair and impartial jury.

Recommendations of Categories of information to avoid releasing

1. Prior criminal record

2. Information about their character or repuation

3. Any confession or refusal to provide information

4. If they have or havent submitted to examination or test

5. Any opinion about the defendant’s guilt

Inference of guilt

Admissibility: Prejudicial information is not admissible at trial because it is unreliable and should not have influence on jury.

Backwards Presumption: Jurors are required to presume innocence unless the trial evidence proves their guilt.

Pretrial Publicity (PTP)

Exposure negatively affects pretrial and post trial judgements of of defendant guilt.

General PTP

Media that is topically related to a case but does not include prejudicial information about defendant.

Can increase the likelihood that jurors will convict the defendant.

Face and Eyes

Models wearing glasses rated higher in intelligence and honesty…

Defendants who wore glasses recieved fewer gulity verdicts (44%) than defendants that did not (56%)

Group Polarization

Occurs when an initial tendency of individual group members in one direction is strengthened following group discussion. 27% awarded sums that were as high or higher than individual members.

Social Comparison

Strive to be perceived favorably. Adopt position in the same direction as a group. More extreme to fit in.

Informational Influences

When groups are initially inclined in one direction, the number and persuasiveness of arguments strengthen the confirmation.

Chivalry Theory

Within the realm of the legal system, women are perceived as less accountable for their action. Thus in need of protection for harsh punishment.

Selective Chivalry Theory

Only women whose crimes are consistent with stereotypical gender roles benefit from paternalistic leniency.

Self Defense Study

Findings showed that when a female abuse victim was on trial for killing her husband, jurors were more likely to find her less guilty and feel more sympathetic compared to a male on trial for killing his abusive wife. Jurors also felt that abusive men killed by their wives were more responsible for their own deaths.

Summary of Juror Determinations

45 years of empirical research on jury decisions between 1955-1999. 37 pages of statistics.

Emergent Themes:

1. jurors often do not make decisions in the manner intended by the courts, regardless of how they are instructed. JURORS DO NOT PAY CAREFUL ATTENTION, DO NOT WITHHOLD JUDGMENT, AND USE SCHEMAS, SCRIPTS, AND STEREOTYPES.

2. dispositional characteristics may predict jury outcomes better than juror verdict preferences. BIAS OF JURY-DEFENDANT DEMOGRAPHIC SIMILARITY IS LARGE. 5-15% with knowledge.

3. Kalven and Zeisel's (1966) "liberation" hypothesis is alive and well. WHEN EVIDENCE DOES NOT CLEARLY FAVOR ONE SIDE, JURORS ARE “LIBERATED” FROM CONSTRAINTS OF EVIDENCE AND MOST SUSCEPTIBLE TO BIAS AND EXTRANEOUS FACTORS.

4. deliberation processes do influence jury outcomes in some situations. AROUND 1 IN 10 TRIALS RESULTS IN A REVERSAL OF THE PREFERENCE INITIALLY FAVORED BY THE MAJORITY OF THE JURY.

Kalven and Zeisel

“jury decisions are influenced by the quality and quantity of the evidence, with a strong and consistent relationship observed between strength of evidence and jury verdicts… observed bias[es]… involve ambiguous evidence.”

Reforms that promote juror comprehension.

1. Using a court appointed experts.

2. Pre-instructing jurors

3. Providing jurors with written copies of judicial instructions

4. Simplifying judicial instructions

5. Allowing them to take notes/ask questions

6. Attorneys provide summaries on the evidence

7. Using verdict forms that must be answered for clarification.

The Leniency Effect

A status quo bias. A pro-acquittal majority is more likely to win than a pro conviction majority.

The Reasonable Person Standard

The idea that a person's behavior is evaluated based on how a typical person would act in similar circumstances, serving as a benchmark for legal liability.

Goal is to steer jurors away from personal opinions and biases.

Negligent

behavior that fails to meet the standard of care expected to prevent harm to others, potentially leading to legal liability.

Self Standard

Consistently emerged as the strongest predictor of social judgement.

The Egocentric Brain

is a concept in psychology that suggests individuals' judgments and decisions are heavily influenced by their own perspectives and experiences, often leading to biased evaluations of themselves and others.

Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

is the standard of proof required in criminal trials, meaning that the evidence must leave no reasonable uncertainty in the mind of the juror regarding the defendant's guilt.

For civil trials…“Guilty more probably than not” >0.5

For criminal trials… Probability of guilt that is very high. 0.9

A double standard

Willingness to vote guilty

Laypersons: 57%

Police Investigators: 61%

Deliberation of Jurors: 68%

Judges: 83%

Laypersons

Their results showed a threshold of guilt below the reasonable doubt standard accepted. Willing to vote guilty when the probability of doubt is less than 0.5.

Serious gap between what we expect juries to do and what they actually do.

Calibrating Confidence

Calibration studies have found people to be overconfident.

When people claim to be 80-90% sure, they turn out to be only 70% or less correct.

A person who claims to be 100% certain does not have to be believed more strongly than someone who is 70% sure.