How do jurors argue with one another?
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2010, Vol 5, Issue 1
Abstract
We asked jurors awaiting trial assignment to listen to a recorded synopsis of an authentic criminal trial and to make a choice among 4 verdict possibilities. Each participant juror then deliberated with another juror whose verdict choice differed, as a microcosm of a full jury’s deliberation. Analysis of the transcripts of these deliberations revealed both characteristics general to the sample and characteristics for which variation appeared across participants. Findings were interpreted in terms of a model of juror reasoning as entailing theory-evidence coordination. More frequently than challenging the other’s statements, we found, a juror agreed with and added to or elaborated them. Epistemological stance — whether knowledge was regarded as absolute and certain or subject to interpretation — predicted several characteristics of discourse. Absolutists were less likely to make reference to the verdict criteria in their discourse. Those who did so, as well as those who made frequent reference to the evidence, were more likely to persuade their discourse partners.
Authors and Affiliations
Joshua Warren, Deanna Kuhn and Michael Weinstock
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677722
- DOI -
- Views 156
- Downloads 0
Affect, risk perception and future optimism after the tsunami disaster
Environmental events such as natural disasters may influence the public's affective reactions and decisions. Shortly after the 2004 Tsunami disaster we assessed how affect elicited by thinking about this disaster influen...
Contamination without contact: An examination of intention-based contagion
Contagion refers to the belief that individuals or objects can acquire the essence of a particular source, such as a disgusting product or an immoral person, through physical contact. This paper documents beliefs in a "c...
Inferring choice criteria with mixture IRT models: A demonstration using ad hoc and goal-derived categories
Whether it pertains to the foods to buy when one is on a diet, the items to take along to the beach on one’s day off or (perish the thought) the belongings to save from one’s burning house, choice is ubiquitous. We aim t...
Age-related differences in adaptive decision making: Sensitivity to expected value in risky choice
While previous research has found that children make more risky decisions than their parents, little is known about the developmental trajectory for the ability to make advantageous decisions. In a sample of children, 5-...
Metacognitive judgment and denial of deficit: Evidence from frontotemporal dementia
Patients suffering from the behavioral variant of Frontotemporal Dementia (FTD-b) often exaggerate their abilities. Are those errors in judgment limited to domains in which patients under-perform, or do FTD-b patients ov...