Abstract
It is acknowledged fact that but a small percentage of criminal cases go to trial, and of these, the proportion heard by juries is not large (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1976). Despite the relatively minor role played by juries in our justice system, however, interest in jury functioning remains particularly strong. This may be so for a number of reasons. First, the jury is the prime repository of societal mores (aside, of course, from the legislature) and it infuses social values directly into the justice system (Tocqueville, 1956). This, in fact, is one of the purposes for the creation of juries (Wigmore, 1929; see also Kaplan & Schersching, 1980). Second, the jury is composed of laymen relatively ignorant of the law; this situation provides an opportunity for observing the public’s response to the laws which govern it. Third, the jury processes divergent sets of information from varied sources to reach a single judgment with moral overtones. This is done first on an individual level, and then in a group context following discussion of the information. The psychological processes involved in information processing and in group interaction render the jury highly attractive for the study of social psychological processes, both intra- and interpersonally. This chapter will explore how jurors process the information they receive in the course of the trial, and most particularly, the effects of juror deliberation on the individual juror’s judgment.
Research reported here was supported by PHS Grant No. 23516, NIMH (Center for Studies of Crime and Delinquency).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Anderson, N. H. Averaging model analysis of set-size effect in impression formation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1967, 75, 158–165.
Anderson, N. H. Information integration theory: A brief survey. In D. Krantz, R. Atkinson, R. D. Luce, and P. Suppes (Eds.), Contemporary developments in mathematical psychology (Vol. 2). San Francisco: Freeman, 1974. (a)
Anderson, N. H. Cognitive algebra: Integration theory applied to social attribution. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 7). New York: Academic Press, 1974. (b).
Anderson, N. H., and Graesser, C. C. An information integration analysis of attitude change in group discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976, 34, 210–222.
Apodaca et al. v. Oregon. United States Reports, 1972, 406, 404–415.
Bales, R. F., Strodtbeck, F. L., Mills, T. M., and Rosenborough, M. E. Channels of communication in small groups. American Sociological Review, 1951, 16, 461–468.
Bumstein, E., and Vinokur, A. Persuasive argumentation and social comparison as determinants of attitude polarization. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1977, 13, 315–332.
Burnstein, E., Vinokur, A., and Trope, Y. Interpersonal comparison vs. persuasive argumentation: A more direct test of alternative explanations for group-induced shifts in individual choice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1973, 9, 236–245.
Davis, J. H. Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes. Psychological Review, 1973, 80, 97–125.
Davis, J. H., Kerr, N. L., Atkin, R. S., Holt, R., and Meek, D. The decision processes of band 12-person juries assigned unanimous and two-thirds majority rules. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 32, 1–14.
Deutsch, M., and Gerard, H. G. A study of informational social influence upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1955, 51, 629–636.
Ebbesen, E. B., and Bowers, R. J. Proportion of risky to conservative arguments in group discussion and choice shift. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 29, 316–327.
Elwork, A., Sales, B. D., and Alfini, J. J. Juridic decisions: In ignorance of the law or in light of it ? Law and Human Behavior, 1977, 1, 163–189.
Feinberg, W. E. Teaching the type I and type II errors: The judicial process. The American Statistician, 1971, 25, 30–32.
Friedman, H. Trial by jury: Criteria for convictions, jury size and type I and type II errors. The American Statistician, 1972, 26, 21–23.
Gibb, C. A. An experimental approach to the study of leadership. Occupational Psychology, 1951, 25, 233–248.
Kalven, H. Jr., and Zeisel, H. The American jury. Boston: Little, Brown, 1966.
Kaplan, M. F. The determination of trait redundancy in personality impression formation. Psychonomic Science, 1971, 23, 280–282.
Kaplan, M. F. The modifying effect of stimulus information on the consistency of individual differences in impression formation. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 1972, 6, 213–219.
Kaplan, M. F. Information integration in social judgment: Interaction of judge and informational components. In M. F. Kaplan and S. Schwartz (Eds.), Human judgment and decision processes. New York: Academic Press, 1975.
Kaplan, M. F. Discussion polarization effects in a modified jury decision paradigm: Informational influences. Sociometry,1977, 40,262–271. (a)
Kaplan, M. F. Judgments by juries. In M. Kaplan and S. Schwartz (Eds.), Judgment and decision processes in applied settings. New York: Academic Press, 1977. (b).
Kaplan, M. F., and Kemmerick, G. D. Juror judgment as information integration: Combining evidential and nonevidential information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 30, 493–499.
Kaplan, M. F., and Miller, C. E. Judgments and group discussion: Effect of presentation and memory factors on polarization. Sociometry, 1977, 40, 337–343.
Kaplan, M. F., and Miller, L. E. Reducing the effects of juror bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1978, 36, 1443–1455.
Kaplan, M. F., and Schersching, C. Reducing juror bias: An experimental approach. In P. Lipsitt and B. Sales (Eds.), New directions in psycholegal research. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1980.
Kerr, N. L., Atkin, R. S., Stasser, G., Meek, O., Holt, R. W., and Davis, J. H. Guilt beyond a reasonable doubt: Effects of concept definition and assigned decision rule on the judgments of mock jurors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976, 34, 282–294.
Laughlin, G. R., and Izzett, R. R. Juror-defendant attitude similarity and choice shift in the jury trial. Paper presented at the meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, 1973.
Levin, I. P. Information integration in transportation decisions. In M. F. Kaplan and S. Schwartz (Eds.), Human judgment and decision processes in applied settings. New York: Academic Press, 1977.
McCrystal, J. L. The promise of prerecorded videotape trials. American Bar Association Journal, 1977, 63, 977–979.
Miller, G. R. The effects of videotaped trial materials on juror response. In G. Bermant, C. Nemeth, and N. Vidmar (Eds.), Psychology and the law. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath, 1976.
Moscovici, S., and Zavalloni, M. The group as a polarizer of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1969, 12, 125–135.
Myers, D. G., and Kaplan, M. F. Group-induced polarization in simulated juries. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1976, 2, 63–66.
Myers, D. G., and Lamm, H. The group polarization phenomenon. Psychological Bulletin, 1976, 83, 602–6627.
Nagel, S. S., and Neef, M. Deductive modeling to determine an optimum jury size and fraction required to convict. Washington University Law Quarterly, 1975, 1975, 933–978.
Nemeth, C. Rules governing jury deliberations: A consideration of recent changes. In G. Bermant, C. Nemeth, and N. Vidmar (Eds.), Psychology and the law. Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Heath, 1976.
Pruitt, D. G. Choice shifts in group discussion: An introductory review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1971, 20, 339–360.
Ryan, J. V. Less than unanimous jury verdicts in criminal trials. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, 1967, 58, 211–217.
Saks, M. J., and Ostrom, T. M. Jury size and consensus requirements: The laws of probability vs. the laws of the land. Journal of Contemporary Law, 1975, 1, 163–173.
Shanteau, J. An informational analysis of risky decision making. In M. F. Kaplan and S. Schwartz (Eds.), Human judgment and decision processes. New York: Academic Press, 1975.
Steindorf, J. Information integration in political choice. Unpublished master’s thesis, Northern Illinois University, 1975.
Thibaut, J., and Walker, L. Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1975.
Tocqueville, A. de. Democracy in America. New York: New American Library, 1956. Ulmer, S. S. Courts as small and not so small groups. New York: General Learning Press, 1971.
U. S. Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1976 (97th ed.). Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1976.
Vidmar, N. Effects of decision alternatives on the verdicts and social perceptions of simulated jurors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1972, 22, 211–218.
Vinokur, A., and Burnstein, E. Effects of partially shared persuasive arguments on groupinduced shifts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 29, 305–315.
Walker, T. G., and Main, E. C. Choice-shifts in political decision making: Federal judges and civil liberties cases. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1973, 2, 39–48.
Wigmore, J. A programme for the trial of jury trial. Journal of the American Judicature Society, 1929, 12, 166–170.
Williams v. Florida, 9. S.Ct. 1893 (1970).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1981 Plenum Press, New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kaplan, M.F., Schersching, C. (1981). Juror Deliberation. In: Sales, B.D. (eds) The Trial Process. Perspectives in Law & Psychology, vol 2. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-3767-6_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-3767-6_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4684-3769-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-4684-3767-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive