Complex scientific testimony: How do jurors make decisions?

被引:122
|
作者
Cooper, J
Bennett, EA
Sukel, HL
机构
[1] Department of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton
关键词
D O I
10.1007/BF01498976
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
Critics of the civil jury system question whether jurors can adequately evaluate complex expert testimony. Based on current models of research in persuasion, we hypothesized that when expert testimony is complex, factors other than content will influence persuasion. Participants, sewing as mock jurors, watched a videotaped trial in which two scientists provided evidence on whether PCBs could have caused a plaintiffs illness. The complexity of the expert's testimony and the strength of the expert's credentials were varied in a 2 x 2 factorial design. After watching the videotape mock jurors rendered a verdict and completed a number of attitude measures related to the trial. Overall, consistent with our prediction we found that jurors were more persuaded by a highly expert witness than by a less expert witness, but only when the testimony was highly complex. When the testimony was less complex, jurors relied primarily on the content of that testimony and witness credentials had little impact on the persuasiveness of the message.
引用
收藏
页码:379 / 394
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] How do people make common medical decisions? Reports from the decisions survey
    Zikmund-Fisher, B. J.
    Couper, M. P.
    Singer, E.
    Ubel, P. A.
    Ziniel, S.
    Fowler, F. J.
    Levin, C. A.
    Fagerlin, A.
    JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2008, 23 : 317 - 317
  • [22] How do people make relevance judgment of scientific data?
    Liu J.
    Wang J.
    Zhou G.
    Wang M.
    Shi L.
    Data Sci. J., 2020, 1
  • [23] Dissonance in how we make decisions and how we want to make decisions
    Kerimi, Neda
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2008, 43 (3-4) : 145 - 145
  • [24] How do you assert a graph? Towards an account of depictions in scientific testimony
    Dethier, Corey
    NOUS, 2024,
  • [25] The impact of different types of expert scientific testimony on mock jurors' liability verdicts
    Bornstein, BH
    PSYCHOLOGY CRIME & LAW, 2004, 10 (04) : 429 - 446
  • [26] A Demonstrative Helps Opposing Expert Testimony Sensitize Jurors to the Validity of Scientific Evidence
    Jones, Angela M.
    Kovera, Margaret Bull
    JOURNAL OF FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY PRACTICE, 2015, 15 (05) : 401 - 422
  • [27] Secondary Confessions: The Influence (or Lack Thereof) of Incentive Size and Scientific Expert Testimony on Jurors' Perceptions of Informant Testimony
    Maeder, Evelyn M.
    Pica, Emily
    LAW AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2014, 38 (06) : 560 - 568
  • [28] Influence of expert degree and scientific validity of testimony on mock Jurors' perceptions of credibility
    Flick, Cassandra
    Smith, Olivia K. H.
    Schweitzer, Kimberly
    APPLIED COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2022, 36 (03) : 494 - 507
  • [30] Hearsay versus children's testimony: Effects of truthful and deceptive statements on jurors' decisions
    Goodman, Gail S.
    Myers, John E. B.
    Qin, Jianjian
    Quas, Jodi A.
    Castelli, Paola
    Redlich, Allison D.
    Rogers, Lisa
    LAW AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2006, 30 (03) : 363 - 401