The results of basic social science research have been applied to legal practice at a number of levels within the criminal and civil justice systems, although its application is controversial at all levels of practice. A selective review of behavioral science research on juror and jury decision making reveals that there has been cumulative and substantial progress in our understanding of these processes over the past three decades. Many of these findings are relevant to the efforts to improve the institution of the petit jury trial.
References
1.
Anderson, N. H. (1959). Test of a model for opinion change. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 371-381.
2.
Asch, S. E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70 (416), 1-64.
3.
Bartol, C. R. (1983). Psychology and American law. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
4.
Chi, M. T. H. , Glaser, R., & Farr, M. J. (1988). The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5.
Couric, E. (1988). The trial lawyers. New York: St. Martin's Press.
6.
Davis, J. H. , Stasson, M., Ono, K., & Zimmerman, S. (1987). The effects of straw polls on group decision making: Sequential voting pattern, timing, and local majorities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 918-926.
7.
Deutsch, M. , & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influence upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629-636.
8.
Ellsworth, P. C. , & Getman, J. G. (1987). Social science in legal decision making. In L. Lipson & S. Wheeler (Eds.), Law and the social sciences (pp. 581-636). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
9.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
10.
Graesser, A. C. , & Clark, L. F (1985). Structures and procedures of implicit knowledge. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
11.
Hans, V. P. , & Vidmar, N. (1986). Judging the jury. New York: Plenum.
12.
Hastie, R. , Penrod, S. D., & Pennington, N. (1983). Inside the jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13.
Hawkins, C. H. (1960). Interaction and coalition alignments in consensus-seeking groups: A study of experimental jury deliberations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago.
14.
Kalven, H., Jr. (1968). The quest for the middle range: Empirical inquiry and legal policy. In G. Hazard (Ed.), Law in a changing America (pp. 56-74). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
15.
Kalven, H., Jr. , & Zeisel, H. (1966). The American jury. Boston: Little, Brown.
16.
Kerr, N. L. , & MacCoun, R. J. (1985). The effects of jury size and polling method on the process and products of jury deliberation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 349-363.
17.
Kintsch, W. , & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363-394.
18.
Klevorick, A. K. , & Rothschild, M. (1979). A model of the jury decision process. Journal of Legal Studies, 8, 141-164.
19.
Kuhn, D. , Pennington, N., & Leadbeater, B. (1983). Adult thinking in developmental perspective. In P. B. Baltes & O. G. Brim (Eds.), Life-span development and behavior (Vol. 5, pp. 86-104). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
20.
Latane, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist, 36, 343-356.
21.
Lempert, R. , & Sanders, J. (1986). An invitation to law and social science. New York: Longman.
22.
Levine, M. E. , & Plott, C. R. (1977). Agenda influence and its implications. Virginia Law Review, 63, 561-604.
23.
MacCoun, R. J. , & Hastie, R. (1989). Determinants and dynamics of evidence-driven versus verdict-driven jury deliberation (Tech. Rep.). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
24.
Mandler, J. M. , & Johnson, N. S. (1977). Remembrance of things parsed: Story structure and recall. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 111-151.
25.
Mauet, T. A. (1981). Fundamentals of trial techniques. Boston: Little, Brown.
26.
Nemeth, C. J. (1986). Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93, 23-32.
27.
Pennington, N. , & Hastie, R. (1981). Juror decision making models: The generalization gap. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 246-287.
28.
Pennington, N. , & Hastie, R. (1986). Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 242-258.
29.
Pennington, N. , & Hastie, R. (1987). Explanation-based decision making. In Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Cognitive Science Society Meetings (pp. 682-690). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30.
Pennington, N. , & Hastie, R. (1988). Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 521-533.
31.
Rosenblum, V. , Phillips, C., Phillips, S. H., & Merrick, H. (1978). Report on the uses of social sciences in judicial decision making (Report to the National Science Foundation). Chicago: Northwestern University Law School.
32.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1977). Understanding and summarizing brief stories. In D. LaBerge & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Perception and comprehension. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
33.
Schank, R. C. , & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34.
Schum, D. A. , & Martin, A. W. (1982). Formal and empirical research on cascaded inference in jurisprudence. Law and Society Review, 17, 105-151.
35.
Shanteau, J. (1988). Psychological characteristics and strategies of expert decision makers. Acta Psychologica, 68, 203-215.
36.
Sherif, M. (1935). A study of some social factors in perception. Psychological Archives, 187, 1-111.
37.
Smith, V. L. (1988). The psychological and legal implications of pre-trial instruction in the law. (Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, 1987). Dissertation Abstracts International, 48, 3451B.
38.
Tversky, A. , & Sattah, S. (1979). Preference trees. Psychological Review, 86, 542-573.
