There exists a substantial literature examining the effect on juror decision-making of extraneous demographic characteristics of plaintiffs and defendants. In most of these studies, members of groups that are perceived as being minorities or as belonging to one of a variety of outgroups (lower socioeconomic status, immigrants) are treated more harshly by jurors, or are perceived as being less deserving or credible. In this study, the authors examine treatment by jurors of a relatively less well investigated outgroup: that of the non-English speaker. An experiment was conducted in which actual jurors in a large urban county were randomly assigned to view a videotape of a civil case. Three versions of the videotapes were identical except that, on one, the plaintiff required an interpreter to communicate and it is approximately three minutes longer than the other two. On the other two versions, the plaintiff spoke English, but differed in ethnicity (Hispanic or Anglo). The findings showed that the non-English-speaking plaintiff did not fare worse than the English speakers, and, in fact, was awarded higher mean damages than either of the English speakers.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bsl.985 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
A psychometric approach to decision-making thresholds across legal and societal domains.
PNAS Nexus
January 2025
Department of Psychology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37240, USA.
What constitutes enough evidence to make a decision? While this is an important question across multiple domains, it takes on special importance in the US legal system, where jurors and judges are instructed to apply specific burdens of proof to render life-changing decisions. Civil trials use a preponderance of evidence (PoE) threshold to establish liability, while criminal trials require proof beyond a reasonable doubt (BaRD) to convict. It is still unclear, however, how laypeople interpret and apply these decision thresholds and how these standards compare to people's intuitive belief (IB) of what constitutes enough evidence.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFThe Role of Complainant/Defendant Gender and Form of Sexual Assault on Jurors' Perceptions of Prototypicality and Verdicts.
J Interpers Violence
February 2025
Department of Psychology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
We sought to test the effects of sexual assault form and complainant/defendant gender on jurors' perceptions of the prototypicality of a sexual assault case, complainant, and defendant. We examined whether these perceived prototypicality measures predict mock jurors' complainant/defendant blame and credibility assessments and if these assessments predict verdict decisions in a simulated sexual assault trial. We predicted that the female complainant-male defendant condition, vaginal intercourse condition, and their combination would be perceived as more prototypical than their counterparts, which would predict blame/credibility assessments, ultimately predicting verdict.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFOlder people's perspectives on frailty screening in primary care settings - a citizens' jury study.
BMC Prim Care
December 2024
Centre for Public Health Equity and Human Flourishing, Torrens University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Background: As the world's population ages, there is a growing concern with frailty, marked by reduced strength and greater vulnerability to stress. Overcoming obstacles like reluctance towards screening methods in this process is crucial for identifying and addressing frailty at an early stage. Understanding older people's perspectives can help adapt screening procedures in primary healthcare settings.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFNavigating uncertainty and negotiating trust in judicial deliberations.
Front Sociol
November 2024
Department of Sociology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Autonomy and independence are key features of legal decision-making. Yet, decision-making in court is fundamentally interactional and collective, both during the information gathering phase of hearings, and in evaluations during deliberations. Depending on legal system and type of court, deliberations can include different constellations of lay judges, jurors, or judge panels.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWhen a Battered Victim Kills Their Abuser: The Impact of Child and Expert Testimony on Mock Jurors' Decision-Making.
J Interpers Violence
October 2024
John Jay College of Criminal Justice, CUNY (City University of New York), New York, USA.
Article Synopsis
- - The study examined how child and expert witness testimonies influence mock jurors' views on a self-defense case involving a woman who killed her husband during a fight, using a 3x3 design with different expert witness types and child witness ages.
- - Mock jurors who heard expert testimony on Battered Woman Syndrome (BWS) perceived the defendant as more guilty, especially when an 8-year-old child testified, leading to harsher sentencing compared to cases with a younger child or no child witness.
- - Despite jurors viewing the defendant as more fearful in the BWS condition, this did not affect their sentencing decisions, highlighting the complex dynamics of expert testimony and child witnesses in domestic violence cases.
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!