國立高雄大學圖資館 |

Language: English

Back

The response of mock jurors to psychological testimony presented in two adversarial trials conducted by practicing attorneys.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	The response of mock jurors to psychological testimony presented in two adversarial trials conducted by practicing attorneys.
Author:	McHenry, Stacey Moody.
Description:	219 p.
Notes:	Director: David Chabot.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 62-12, Section: B, page: 6025.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International62-12B.
Subject:	Psychology, Social.
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3037224
ISBN:	0493502351

The response of mock jurors to psychological testimony presented in two adversarial trials conducted by practicing attorneys.
McHenry, Stacey Moody.

The response of mock jurors to psychological testimony presented in two adversarial trials conducted by practicing attorneys.[electronic resource] - 219 p.

Director: David Chabot.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Fordham University, 2002.

Jurors in the live and videotaped trial conditions demonstrated that they were able to understand psychological expert testimony. Consistent with understanding the testimony, jurors relied more on the helpfulness, intelligence, honesty, attractiveness, and assertiveness of the experts than the experts' credentials in making their decisions. Jurors found the expert testimony helpful, but they did not discuss the expert testimony as much as was predicted during deliberations. Attorneys were most accurate in predicting the aspects of trial that would be helpful to the jurors prior to the trials, consistent with when predictions regarding the helpfulness of expert testimony are made by attorneys in authentic trials. Anticipated differences between the live and videotaped conditions of the trial were not detected. However, robust findings from the mock trial literature were replicated, supporting the success of the authentic mock trial design.

ISBN: 0493502351Subjects--Topical Terms:

177541
Psychology, Social.

The response of mock jurors to psychological testimony presented in two adversarial trials conducted by practicing attorneys.
LDR:03259nmm 2200289 450 001 155083
005 20030117152120.5
008 230530s2002 eng d
020 $a 0493502351
035 $a 00087608
035 $a 155083
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 0 $a McHenry, Stacey Moody. $3 212748
245 1 0 $a The response of mock jurors to psychological testimony presented in two adversarial trials conducted by practicing attorneys. $h [electronic resource]
300 $a 219 p.
500 $a Director: David Chabot.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 62-12, Section: B, page: 6025.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Fordham University, 2002.
520 # $a Jurors in the live and videotaped trial conditions demonstrated that they were able to understand psychological expert testimony. Consistent with understanding the testimony, jurors relied more on the helpfulness, intelligence, honesty, attractiveness, and assertiveness of the experts than the experts' credentials in making their decisions. Jurors found the expert testimony helpful, but they did not discuss the expert testimony as much as was predicted during deliberations. Attorneys were most accurate in predicting the aspects of trial that would be helpful to the jurors prior to the trials, consistent with when predictions regarding the helpfulness of expert testimony are made by attorneys in authentic trials. Anticipated differences between the live and videotaped conditions of the trial were not detected. However, robust findings from the mock trial literature were replicated, supporting the success of the authentic mock trial design.
520 # $a Two mock trials incorporating unscripted testimony of psychologists and psychiatrists were conducted by practicing attorneys to investigate how jurors respond to expert psychological testimony. To support the continued admissibility of psychological expert testimony in state and federal trials under Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, community and student participants were evaluated for their abilities to understand psychological expert testimony on the topic of suicide presented in live and videotaped trial formats. The helpfulness of expert testimony, within the meaning of Rule 702, was considered both subjectively, through examination of the jurors' ratings of the experts, and objectively, through examination of the jurors' use of the expert testimony during deliberations. Relationships between the demographic characteristics, pretrial attitudes, and witness ratings of the jurors and the individual verdicts rendered by the jurors were explored. Attorneys' abilities to predict the most helpful, important, and persuasive aspects of the trial to the jurors were explored also. The success of the authentic mock trial design was defined as the extent to which the study replicated robust findings from the mock trial literature.
590 $a School code: 0072.
650 # 0 $a Psychology, Social. $3 177541
650 # 0 $a Law. $3 207600
690 $a 0398
690 $a 0451
710 0 # $a Fordham University. $3 212747
773 0 # $g 62-12B. $t Dissertation Abstracts International
790 $a 0072
790 1 0 $a Chabot, David, $e advisor
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2002
856 4 0 $u http://libsw.nuk.edu.tw/login?url=http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3037224 $z http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3037224