The utility of the reasonable woman legal standard in hostile environment sexual harassment cases: A multimethod, multistudy examination.

The case of Ellison v. Brady (1991) was a landmark decision in establishing a new legal standard-the reasonable woman standard-for evaluating hostile environment allegations of sexual harassment and in relying, albeit indirectly, on social science evidence to support its decision. The authors review the legal standard in sexual harassment law, and the legal arguments and social science evidence underlying Ellison. The new standard could affect judgments broadly by sensitizing jurors to the situation of a female plaintiff, or it could affect judgments selectively by sensitizing only those people who might otherwise be especially insensitive to her situation. Five studies that focus on the effect of the reasonable woman standard on people's assessments of hostile environment sexual harassment indicate that the reasonable woman standard has modest, if any, effects on the judgments studied. Implications are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

In the Supreme Court of the United States Lockhart v. McCree: Amicus curiae brief for the American Psychological Association.

Presents an amicus curiae brief prepared by the American Psychological Association and submitted to the US Supreme Court in its October 1985 term. The case concerned A. L. Lockhart, Director Arkansas Department of Correction, Petitioner, v. Ardia V. McCree, Respondent, and was filed in support of the petitioner. The issue is whether a "death-qualified" jury, one formed under standards developed in Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (1968), is more likely to convict a capital criminal defendant than a jury that—like juries formed in all noncapital criminal cases—also includes members of the venire who, because of absolute scruples against imposing the death penalty, are excluded from death-qualified juries. The authors critique the methodology and major empirical findings in the relevant research and evaluate the data in light of the States' 8 major criticisms of this research. Amicus demonstrates that the studies show that death-qualified juries are prosecution prone and unrepresentative of the community and that death qualification impairs proper jury functioning. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Understanding Pretrial Publicity: Predecisional Distortion of Evidence by Mock Jurors.

Prejudicial pretrial publicity (PTP) constitutes a serious source of juror bias. The current study examined differences in predecisional distortion for mock jurors exposed to negative PTP (N-PTP) versus nonexposed control participants. According to work by K. A. Carlson and J. E. Russo (2001), predecisional distortion occurs when jurors bias new evidence in favor of their current leading party (prosecution or defense) rather than evaluating this information for its actual probative properties. Jury-eligible university students (N=116) acted as jurors in a mock trial. Elevated rates of guilty verdicts were observed in the N-PTP condition. Predecisional distortion scores were significantly higher in the N-PTP condition and reflected a proprosecution bias. The effect of prejudicial PTP on verdict outcomes was mediated by predecisional distortion in the evaluation of testimony. Results are discussed in relation to motivated decision making and confirmation biases. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Describing jurors' personal conceptions of insanity and their relationship to case judgments.

In a series of studies, prototype theory was applied to describe the nature, variability, and effect of jurors' conceptions of insanity. Specifically, (a) 80 jurors described the features of their prototypes of insanity, (b) 5 jurors combined similar features to develop a core set of features to measure individual differences, and (c) 135 jurors and 236 undergraduates completed measures of individual differences in prototypes and attitudes toward the insanity defense and the criminal justice system and rendered insanity case judgments. Results suggest that (a) jurors' prototypes of insanity cannot be reduced to legal or psychiatric constructs; (b) although there are marked individual differences in prototypes, there are 3 identifiable groups of jurors with prototypes that emphasize severe mental disability, "moral insanity," and mental state at the time of the offense; and (c) these prototypes are associated with case-relevant attitudes and affect the way in which jurors interpret case information and render verdicts. Implications for future research, legal reform, and the presentation of expert evidence are analyzed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Contributions of social science to innovation and productivity.

Argues that the current debate on national productivity and innovation has largely ignored the contributions of social science. In the present article, 3 trends and developments are considered: social science as a decision aid, social science as a source of social technology, and social science as a tool for understanding innovation and productivity. Major inhibiting factors in the use of social science include its nonproprietary nature, the disaggregation of social science support, and the isolation of social science from decision making. The continued de-emphasis of social science research is seen as harmful for the nation's knowledge base and for its efforts to achieve economic and technological revitalization. (23 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Returning basic research to the community: A relationship between scientist and citizen.

Demonstrates how citizens can use the information gained through a basic research project to benefit both the social scientist and the community being studied. A case study is presented based on the experience of the Neighborhood Participation Project, which studied citizen participation in a racially integrated neighborhood in Nashville, Tennessee. After gathering longitudinal data from residents, the researchers embarked on a process of working with a neighborhood agency (Neighborhood Housing Services) and a neighborhood organization (Sunnyside Community Citizens) to give away both the process and content of their research. The case study is presented to highlight some important issues for returning basic research to the community. The authors suggest that creating partnerships and linkages between social scientists and citizens can improve the quality of social science research, enhance the potential for using research, encourage public support for social science research, and help people help themselves. (37 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Juror comprehension and public policy: Perceived problems and proposed solutions.

Laypersons, the media, and many legal scholars tend to attribute problems in the jury system to the dispositions of individual jurors and to recommend reforms in jury selection procedures and relaxation of the unanimity rule. Social scientists view problems as a consequence of the structure of the jurors' task and recommend reforms in trial procedures. After years of apathy, the legal system has proposed, and in some jurisdictions implemented, a variety of reforms, most of which are based on the social science perspective that the problem is not due to bad jurors but to unnecessary procedural obstacles to high-quality decision making. These reforms are described in the final section of the article. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The American Psychological Association's response to Brown v. Board of Education: The case of Kenneth B. Clark.

In 1954, in Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court struck down the "separate but equal" doctrine of the Plessy v. Ferguson decision (1896) that was the foundation of school segregation in 17 states and the District of Columbia. Brown is arguably the most important Supreme Court decision of the 20th century in terms of its influence on American history. Moreover, it has a special significance for psychology because it marked the first time that psychological research was cited in a Supreme Court decision and because social science data were seen as paramount in the Court's decision to end school segregation. This article describes psychologist Kenneth B. Clark's role in that case and the response of the American Psychological Association to scientific psychology's moment in a great spotlight. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Assessment of the commonsense psychology underlying Daubert: Legal decision makers' abilities to evaluate expert evidence in hostile work environment cases.

In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993), the Supreme Court justices relied on commonsense psychological assumptions about the decision-making capabilities of judges and jurors and the effectiveness of safeguards designed to protect the jury from depending on unreliable evidence. This article reviews the empirical evidence on legal decision makers' abilities to evaluate the quality of expert evidence and the effectiveness of procedural safeguards presumed to assist judges and jurors in these evaluations in hostile work environment cases. This evidence suggests that judges, attorneys, and jurors are not particularly skilled in identifying flawed research. Although opposing experts may be able to recognize flawed research, they may be unwilling to testify or their testimony may be ineffective. Suggestions for future research and ways of improving judges' decision-making abilities are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Neural network modeling of risk assessment in child protective services.

The advantages of using neural network methodology for the modeling of complex social science data are demonstrated, and neural network analysis is applied to Washington State Child Protective Services risk assessment data. Neural network modeling of the association between social worker overall assessment of risk and the 37 separate risk factors from the State of Washington Risk Assessment Matrix is shown to provide case classification results superior to linear or logistic multiple regression. The improvement in case prediction and classification accuracy is attributed to the superiority of neural networks for modeling nonlinear relationships between interacting variables; in this respect the mathematical framework of neural networks is a better approximation to the actual process of human decision making than linear, main effects regression. The implications of this modeling advantage for evaluating social science data within the framework of ecological theories are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of motive information and crime unusualness on jurors' judgments in insanity cases

This study investigated the effects of motive information and crime unusualness on mock jurors' judgments in two homicide cases in which the defendant pleaded insanity. Undergraduates (N = 371) read case information and rendered a verdict, estimated the probability that the defendant was insane, and made additional judgments about the defendant's mental state. The defendant was more likely to be judged insane if the crime was oddly committed rather than committed in a typical manner. Prosecution motive information also affected judgments; the defendant was considered more sane if the prosecution presented evidence of a strong, reasonable motive. Evidence of a "crazy," unreasonable motive, presented by the defense, caused jurors to see the defendant in one of the cases as more insane.     

Child custody resolution: A study of social science involvement and impact.

To explore the use of mental health professional expertise in the legal system, legal professionals' sources of social science information, and the legal profession's perspectives on the appropriate roles of mental health professionals in the process, we solicited information from attorneys and judges on (a) the extent to which they actively seek the involvement of mental health professionals in child custody cases, (b) the factors that influence such involvement, and (c) the degree to which these attitudes and practices are influenced by social science data or theory. Among the most striking features of these results was the report by the overwhelming majority of legal professionals that they did not consider either social science data or mental health professionals' involvement or recommendations in child custody cases as critical to their practice of family law. Specifically, mental health participation was rarely solicited, and when it was, this decision rested primarily on the paradigmatic regularities of the legal system or practical needs of the case rather than on a view that such involvement was central to the client's or child's mental health. The implications of these findings for collaboration between the mental health and legal disciplines in the area of family policy are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The Prejudicial Nature of Victim Impact Statements: Implications for Capital Sentencing Policy.

Victim impact evidence is presented during sentencing hearings to convey the harm experienced by victims and victims' relatives as a result of a crime. Its use in capital cases is highly controversial. Some argue that the Supreme Court's decision to allow the admission of victim impact statements (VIS) during capital sentencing proceedings (Payne v. Tennessee, 1991) invites prejudice and judgments based on emotion rather than reason. Others reason that it provides an important voice for survivors and affords the jury an opportunity to learn about the victim. The authors outline the chief psychological issues that arise in the context of VIS, including their relevance to jurors' judgments of blameworthiness, concerns that the social worth of the victim will influence jurors' sentencing decisions, and issues related to the emotional appeal of VIS. Psycholegal research on the influence of VIS on mock jurors is reviewed, and implications of this work for capital sentencing policy and suggested directions for future research are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effect of jury deliberations on jurors' propensity to disregard inadmissible evidence.

The goal of this research was to examine the effect of jury deliberations on juror's propensity to disregard inadmissible evidence. Extant research is inconclusive; some research indicates that jurors do follow judicial instructions to ignore inadmissible evidence, but other research suggests that jurors do not. Two experiments examined whether jurors were affected by inadmissible evidence. The results revealed that although mock jurors were biased by inadmissible evidence prior to deliberations, the bias was tempered following deliberations. In Experiment 1, post deliberation jurors disregarded incriminating evidence that was ruled inadmissible because of due-process concerns. Experiment 2 replicated these results with less incriminating inadmissible evidence and also revealed that jurors did not accurately gauge the impact that the inadmissible evidence had on their verdicts. Theoretical and judicial policy implications are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Jurors' use of naked statistical evidence: Exploring bases and implications of the Wells effect.

G. L. Wells (1992) demonstrated that jurors react differently to probabilistic evidence indicating that there is an 80% chance the defendant committed an act than they do to 80% reliable evidence indicating the defendant committed an act. Even though jurors report that the probability of guilt is approximately 80% for both forms, they are much more likely to find against the defendant in the latter than in the former case, a phenomenon the authors term the Wells effect. Three experiments explore a variety of possible explanations for the Wells effect. Results provided the most consistent support for an ease-of-simulation mechanism, which holds that jurors are more reluctant to convict when they can easily simulate a scenario in which the defendant is not guilty. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Scientific method and the adversary model: Some preliminary thoughts.

Criticizes the use of the basic experimental method in an effort to demonstrate that it fails to yield certainty because of its application to the complex social human being. Limitations of the "experiment as science" concept include the impossibility of creating a social vacuum, difficulties in generalization from laboratory conditions, problems in specifying certain areas of study, and problems with imprecise human observers. Scientific methodology is related to 4 basic assumptions of the scientific enterprise: that human events occur in social and historical contexts; that intelligence attempts to make sense out of what it observes; that science is a social enterprise seeking to predict, understand, and manipulate behavior; and that the scientific enterprise adheres to an adversary model. Based on an analogy drawn between the features of this model and those of the legal model (e.g., proceedings, arguments, lines of evidence, and decision criterion), some suggestions for a stronger adversary model are proposed: (a) inclusion of an independent "adversary" on research teams to "cross-examine" evidence; (b) evaluation of an investigator's characteristic emotions, distortions, and fantasies by an independent person; and (c) compilation and classification of various types of evidence and possible inferences by an interdisciplinary research team. (44 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Hindsight bias, Daubert, and the silicone breast implant litigation: Making the case for court-appointed experts in complex medical and scientific litigation.

Empirical research indicates that knowledge of the outcome in a given case influences juror deliberations. This bias is compounded when the jury must evaluate complex scientific evidence. Because jurors typically lack the background necessary to evaluate such evidence, they often use hindsight as a "cognitive shortcut." "Junk science" can exacerbate this tendency by offering a "scientific" link between the injury and the product. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993), properly applied, can defuse junk science testimony and mitigate its distorting effect on legal outcomes. The authors argue that judges carrying out Daubert's prerogatives should, where feasible, appoint independent experts and science panels to educate themselves and the jury, and thereby improve the likelihood that legal decisions will be based on sound scientific understanding. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effect of hearsay witness age in a child sexual assault trial.

This study investigated the effect of a hearsay witness on perceptions of an alleged victim in a sexual assault trial. Male and female participants read a fictional criminal court case summary involving a sexual assault, in which a 7-, 16-, or 25-year-old hearsay witness testified on behalf of a 6- or 15-year-old alleged victim. The prosecution case included the testimony of 1 primary witness: the alleged child victim, a hearsay witness, or a clinical psychologist. A post hoc control group had no primary witness. The hearsay witness led to as much support of the alleged victim as the child and the expert witness and more support than the control group. Women were consistently more supportive of the alleged victim than men. A 3-way interaction of age of hearsay witness, age of alleged victim, and sex of participant was discussed in terms of the effect of these factors on how mock jurors use hearsay testimony in a child sexual assault trial. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Cognitive mediation of inconsistency discounting.

Conducted 2 experiments to examine the effects of inconsistency and credibility information in a complex, multiple source, multiple communication criminal trial setting. The source of the inconsistent testimony was low in credibility. The testimony structure was manipulated such that association of the sources with the content of their testimony was facilitated (high person focus) or disrupted (low person focus). Ss participated as mock jurors who read testimony, rendered verdicts, and attempted to recall the testimony. Exp I, conducted with 96 paid Ss, demonstrated that discounting of inconsistent testimony was likely under conditions of high but not low person focus. Exp II, conducted with 48 undergraduates, examined the relation between jurors' spontaneous cognitive reactions at encoding and the jurors' verdicts. Only high person focus jurors discounted the inconsistent testimony at encoding. Results suggest that discounting occurs in the context of jurors generating an integrated cognitive representation of the trial events that is a function of both the actual testimony items and jurors' own spontaneous inferences. Several other information-processing consequences, such as the organization of recall and memory for consistent and inconsistent testimony items, were also examined. These data are considered in terms of their implications for recent cognitive elaboration models and models of juror decision making. (50 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)