Jury decision making models

Decision making literature paints a skeptical picture of jurors ability to interpret this evidence. The volume summarizes existing theories of jury decision making and identifies what we have learned about jury behavior, including the effects of specific courtroom practices, the nature of the trial, the characteristics of the participants, and the evidence itself. Keywords juries, decision making, public policy the jury is a unique institution. Much research has been conducted to further our understanding of what verdicts juries are likely to render when faced with.

In exp 1, varying the ease with which stories could be. Jurors make decisions just like other human beings do, but they do so in an environment that is different from everyday individual decisionmaking. By isolating a small group of individuals together under the pretense that a decision must. Models of jury as opposed to juror decision making examine how individual preferences combine dur. Decisionmaking usually involves a mixture of intuition and rational thinking. The jury is a central part of the american legal system and is also an important legal decisionmaker across the world. The jury is generally a competent decision making body, rendering decisions that vary appropriately with the strength of evidence. Devine examines over 50 years of research on juries and offers a big picture overview of the field. Jury research suggests that jurors might actually be able to interpret and use this evidence. Acommon feature of these models is the use ofthe group statethe distribution ofjurors across distinct verdict factionsas the unit ofanalysis.

The order in which the story is told can effect jury decision making. Reform 712 1973, the author tested the deliberations of larger and smaller panels by showing to sets of both sizes the video tape of a single mock civil trial. While jury decision making has received considerable attention from social scientists, there have been few efforts to systematically pull together all the pieces of this research. Researchers have studied juries through mathematical modeling, using social psychological theory, and using explanation. Group decision making also known as collaborative decision making is a situation faced when individuals collectively make a choice from the alternatives before them. The volume summarizes existing theories of jury decision making and identifies what we have learned about jury behavior, including the effects of specific courtroom practices, the nature of the trial, the. Jury decision making psychology and law iresearchnet. Psychological research has implications for jury decision making. Included are the legal model, in which the decisions are based solely on the provided facts on the case.

Pennington and hastie 1990 easy to understand order increases guilty verdicts. Jury deliberations and verdicts are expressions of judgment. In 2003, jim dwyer, peter neufeld and barry scheck published actual innocence, an eye. Some of these models have involved attempts to identify relationships between juror or population characteristics and jury outcomes e. An experiment was designed to test a model of jury decision making. In the courts of the united states there are three different models of judicial decision making that the supreme court uses. According to the story model, the process of decision making takes place in three steps. Jury selection pretrial publicity jury decision making u. It requires ordinary citizens who lack legal training to hear evidence, make sense of con. This model, the linear discrepancy model, is an informationprocessing model which posits. Experimental research on jury decision making author. An application of the elaboration likelihood model to jurors decision making in a complex lawsuit by leslie a.

The second half of the model describes how the jury. Cognitive representation of information presented at trial explanationbased story model 3 processes in jury decision making. This article uses conversational data from simulated jury deliberations to describe jurors practice of articulating schematic interpretations as accounts for their verdict choices. These models make a number of assumptions about the dynamics ofjury deliberation that have been assessed empirically. Scott a thesis submitted to the faculty of the graduate school of loyola university of chicago in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of master of. Jury psychology from psych 3cc3 at mcmaster university. Kaplan and cullisons model for jury decision making. There are rational models, intuitive models, rationaliterative models as well as 5, 6, 7 and even 9 step decision models. Diagram depicting how typical jurors process information during trials. The jury is a remarkable example of the use of groups to make decisions. The order in which the story is told can effect jury decisionmaking. Our conclusion is that the juror is a sense making information processor who strives to create a mean. To begin, we outline various cognitive models of juror decisionmaking that have.

Download citation theoretical models of jury decision making the jury is a central part of the american legal system and is also an important legal decision maker across the world. Factors influencing jury decision making, created by katie greensted on 29052019. The jury has been one of the most mysterious forces in united states law. In each instance the model is described and compared with related models, its assumptions are scrutinized, its fit to normative data is evaluated, and possible revisions and extensions of the model are discussed. The juror decision scale jds and acceptance of modern myths about sexual aggression ammsa measure were completed by 324 jury eligible participants split across 27 jury panels, after observing a rape trial reenactment high in ecological validity. N2 this chapter, and indeed the entire book, focuses on some old topics, namely legal consciousness, legal decision making, and the interaction between the two. Jury verdicts directly affect the lives of hundreds of thousands of people in the united states every year and serve a bellwether function in plea bargaining and settlement negotiations. Law of large numbers, flawed perception on chance, bayesian models, disregard base rates. Much research has been conducted to further our understanding of what verdicts juries are likely to render when faced with particular trial facts and players.

Because trial juries deliberate in secrecy, legal debates about jury functioning have relied heavily on anecdote and speculation. The decision making processes of individual jurors is only one element of jury decision making, which takes place in the context of group deliberation. Statistical reasoning, and the size of the jury, 68 camf. Sage reference story model for juror decision making. This chapter first examines the four main methods of jury research. Explanationbased story model juror as active participants incorporate jurors unique experiences, knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes that may affect how they interpret the evidence and decide guilt. The story model for jury decision making, by nancy pennington and reid hastie from inside the juror 4 the meter model of juror decision making two conceptions of the juror, lola lopes from inside the juror session 8 march 19, 2008.

Lets say that the trial is over, all the evidence has been seen, and the trier i. For a more detailed criticism of the models cited in ballew v. Making use of those foundations, devine offers a new integrated theory of jury decision making that addresses both. Experimental research on jury decisionmaking science. The story model not only describes the process the juror undergoes when making a decision in a trial but claims that the story constructed by the juror ultimately. Story model for juror decision making forensic psychology. An informationprocessing model of jury decision making. A scoping study of key psychosocial theories to inform the design and analysis of the panel study section 1. This theoretical starting point for the process of jury decision making outlines the causeandeffect relationship between how jurors process trial evidence in a narrative fashion i.

Jury decision making 625 preaches, most jury level models have sought to predict jury outcomes e. This study investigated the utility of the story model for decision making at the jury level by examining the influence of evidence order and deliberation style on. Jurors may put more stress on the concrete event, rather than an assessment of probabilities of an injury or accident. The story model theory to juror decision making is an explanationbased approach that emphasizes jurors cognitive organization and representation of facts. Some research has examined the decisionmaking process at the jury level, but the majority of research has examined juror decision making processes at the individual level. Jury decision making 45 years of empirical research on. Jury size and decision rule both the size of the jury and the number of jurors who must be in agreement for a verdict to be concluded the groups social decision rule have been the subject of litigation at the u. The first half of the model describes how jurors use the evidence they hear during trial to create narrative explanations or stories about how trialrelated events likely occurred. Current directions in psychological jury decision making. Understanding the dynamics of decision making and choice.

The story model for juror decision making chapter 8. Juror decision making social science flashcards quizlet. To better explain how jurors make decisions in trial, psychologists have proposed a variety of decision making models. Most, however, move through each of the basic stages in decision making. Use as filter to decide what evidence is relevant and should be retained, and what evidence to discard. Critics have leveled extensive allegations that juries are unpredictable, unrepresentative of the population of the united states, biased, and irresponsible. Leading jury and decision making researchers recently discussed how psychological science can examine individual and group decision making.

Use as framework for analyzing evidence and arguments during trial. Factors influencing jury decisionmaking my a levels. In the sections that follow, where possible, we apply aspects of these models to applied problems in the legal realm. An important tool in this effort has been the mock jury experiment, in which research participants are randomly assigned to alternative trial conditions and asked to. In arriving at their verdicts, jurors must determine what really happened in the case at hand.

A jury is composed of untrained citizens, drawn randomly from the eligible population. Their interpretations then guide their decision making and become influential in the group deliberation process. When an individual gives up their personal views due to group pressure. To begin, we outline various cognitive models of juror decisionmaking that have been advanced and tested in recent decades. The many decision making models that exist nowadays means that you even have to make a decision as to which one to use. The story model not only describes the process the juror undergoes when making a decision in a trial but claims that the story constructed by the. Conversely, psychological research can inform trial procedures, enabling juries to benefit from fairer procedures and reach better outcomes. Although story construction is central in our theory and has been the focus of most. Some research has examined the decision making process at the jury level, but the majority of research has examined juror decision making processes at the individual level. Theoretical models of jury decisionmaking researchgate. A jury is composed of untrained citizens, drawn randomly from the eligible population, convened briefly for a particular trial, entrusted with great official powers, permitted to deliberate in secret, to render a verdict without explanation, and without any accountability then or ever, to return to private life.

Story model for juror decision making to better explain how jurors make decisions in trial, psychologists have proposed a variety of decision making models. Mathematical models of juror and jury decisionmaking. These models are typically grouped into two categories. The convergence of explanatory coherence and the story model. The jury method of deciding guilt involves group deliberation with an obligation of group unanimity, or adherence to some other formal decision rule, before a decision can be made foss, 1976. Convergence of viewpoints may reflect reasonable compromises, for example if jury deliberations reflect informational influences and social learning which allow individual jurors to correct biases, misunderstandings andor imperfect recall of evidence. This is because all the individuals and social group processes such as social. In many civil jury trials, negligence and causation are commonly centered on the jurors judgment of the case. Understanding the dynamics of decisionmaking and choice.

Hasties 1986, 1988 explanationbased theory of decision making for juror decisions. In recent years, investigators have begun to challenge many common assumptions about jury behavior. Introduction this paper provides an overview of some of the main psychological models of decision making and choice and assesses their relevance to disabled and. Models of jury decision making are then discussed with specific reference to the story model, predecisional distortion and source monitoring errors.

We have explored how jurors process evidence such as confession evidence or expert testimony, testing how jurors perceive the evidence and. The story model of juror decisionmaking umkc school of law. The legal model of judicial decision making that the. In note, an empirical study of six and twelvemember jury decision making processes, 6 u. Introduction and validation of the juror decision scale jds. In jury decision making, individual viewpoints must converge to reach a group consensus. The story model rests on the assumption that jurors organize evidence they hear during trial in a narrative, storylike format. In total, 206 distinguishable studies involving deliberating juries actual or mock were located and grouped into 4 categories on the basis of their focal variables. Jury psychology jury selection pretrial publicity jury.

The conditions of trial and the group setting create some demanding characteristics that can lead to the use of cognitive shortcuts or unconscious biases influencing decisionmaking, and group dynamics can also play a role. Jury decision making has implications for psychological research. The decision is then no longer attributable to any single individual who is a member of the group. Attribution theory there have been a number of approaches regarding attribution theory. Thus, jury decision making has implications for psychological theory, and psychological research has implications for legal policy. The jury setting in the criminal justice system offers a unique social setting that provides the opportunity for social influence within networks.

Further, they state that the research on mock juries has often been. A common feature of these models is the use of the group statethe distribution of jurors across distinct verdict factionsas the unit of analysis. A look inside the jury room yvette tinsley abstract although there exists a large body of research literature on the jury system, only a small amount of research has been able to tap the attitudes and behaviour of actual jurors, and this has principally been confined to the united states. Research into jury decision making has shed light on many phenomena in criminal and civil legal systems, but many questions remain. Juror and jury decision making in this line of research, we have focused on evaluating how jurors make decisions in various contexts, with the goal of helping jurors make the best possible decisions. A jury is composed of untrained citizens, drawn randomly from the eligible population, convened briefly for a particular trial, entrusted with great official powers, permitted to deliberate in secret, to render a verdict without explanation. A jury is composed of untrained citizens, drawn randomly from the eligible population, convened briefly for a particular trial, entrusted with great official powers, permitted to deliberate in secret, to render a. Some research has examined the decisionmaking process at the jury level, but the majority of research has examined juror decisionmaking processes at the individual level.