國立高雄大學圖資館 |

登入

回首頁

The differential effects of American and British trial proceedings on juror decision-making.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	The differential effects of American and British trial proceedings on juror decision-making.
作者:	Collett, Marisa Evelyn.
面頁冊數:	167 p.
附註:	Major Professor: Margaret Bull Kovera.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 62-06, Section: B, page: 2989.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International62-06B.
標題:	Psychology, Social.
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3018477
ISBN:	0493293736

The differential effects of American and British trial proceedings on juror decision-making.
Collett, Marisa Evelyn.

The differential effects of American and British trial proceedings on juror decision-making.[electronic resource] - 167 p.

Major Professor: Margaret Bull Kovera.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Florida International University, 2001.

Seven basic elements differentiate British from American trial procedures: confining attorneys to their tables; dealing with objections outside the presence of the jury; resolving disagreements between attorneys prior to objections being made; presenting the defense opening statement at the close of the prosecution case; the judge directly questions witnesses and has a wider latitude in controlling the evidence; and the judge gives a summation of all the evidence presented to the jury (Fulero & Turner, 1997). The present experiment examined the influence of these different courtroom procedures, judges' non-verbal behavior, and evidence strength on juror decision-making. Using models of persuasion to understand how the varying elements may effect juror decision-making, it was predicted that trials following American courtroom procedures would be more distracting for jurors and as such, they would be more likely to rely on the peripheral cue of the judge's expectations for trial outcome as expressed in his nonverbal behavior. In trials following British procedures jurors should be less distracted and better able to scrutinize the strength of the evidence that in turn should minimize the influence of the judge's nonverbal behavior. Two hundred forty-five participants viewed a mock civil trial in which courtroom procedure, judge's nonverbal behavior, and evidence strength were varied. Analyses suggest that courtroom procedure and evidence strength influenced the direction of participants' verdicts, but that judge's nonverbal behavior did not have a direct impact on verdict preference. Judge's nonverbal behavior appeared to influence other measures related to verdict. Participants were more confident in their verdicts when they agreed with judge's nonverbal behavior and when they viewed British courtroom procedures. Participants were more likely to return estimates of the defendant's liability that reflected judge's nonverbal behavior and a congruency with evidence strength. Participants also recalled more facts in the British conditions than in the American conditions. These findings are interpreted as indicating the importance of the impact of trial procedures and of nonverbal influence.

ISBN: 0493293736Subjects--Topical Terms:

177541
Psychology, Social.

The differential effects of American and British trial proceedings on juror decision-making.
LDR:03270nmm 2200277 450 001 154980
005 20021105151516.5
008 230530s2001 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 0493293736
035 $a 00087505
035 $a 154980
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 0 $a Collett, Marisa Evelyn. $3 212569
245 1 0 $a The differential effects of American and British trial proceedings on juror decision-making. $h [electronic resource]
300 $a 167 p.
500 $a Major Professor: Margaret Bull Kovera.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 62-06, Section: B, page: 2989.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Florida International University, 2001.
520 # $a Seven basic elements differentiate British from American trial procedures: confining attorneys to their tables; dealing with objections outside the presence of the jury; resolving disagreements between attorneys prior to objections being made; presenting the defense opening statement at the close of the prosecution case; the judge directly questions witnesses and has a wider latitude in controlling the evidence; and the judge gives a summation of all the evidence presented to the jury (Fulero & Turner, 1997). The present experiment examined the influence of these different courtroom procedures, judges' non-verbal behavior, and evidence strength on juror decision-making. Using models of persuasion to understand how the varying elements may effect juror decision-making, it was predicted that trials following American courtroom procedures would be more distracting for jurors and as such, they would be more likely to rely on the peripheral cue of the judge's expectations for trial outcome as expressed in his nonverbal behavior. In trials following British procedures jurors should be less distracted and better able to scrutinize the strength of the evidence that in turn should minimize the influence of the judge's nonverbal behavior. Two hundred forty-five participants viewed a mock civil trial in which courtroom procedure, judge's nonverbal behavior, and evidence strength were varied. Analyses suggest that courtroom procedure and evidence strength influenced the direction of participants' verdicts, but that judge's nonverbal behavior did not have a direct impact on verdict preference. Judge's nonverbal behavior appeared to influence other measures related to verdict. Participants were more confident in their verdicts when they agreed with judge's nonverbal behavior and when they viewed British courtroom procedures. Participants were more likely to return estimates of the defendant's liability that reflected judge's nonverbal behavior and a congruency with evidence strength. Participants also recalled more facts in the British conditions than in the American conditions. These findings are interpreted as indicating the importance of the impact of trial procedures and of nonverbal influence.
590 $a School code: 1023.
650 # 0 $a Psychology, Social. $3 177541
650 # 0 $a Law. $3 207600
690 $a 0398
690 $a 0451
710 0 # $a Florida International University. $3 212568
773 0 # $g 62-06B. $t Dissertation Abstracts International
790 $a 1023
790 1 0 $a Kovera, Margaret Bull, $e advisor
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2001
856 4 0 $u http://libsw.nuk.edu.tw/login?url=http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3018477 $z http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3018477