Legal theories, research on memory, and social psychological models of information integration and attribution led to three hypotheses as to why this bias might occur: confusion of evidence, accumulation of evidence, and inference of a criminal disposition. Subjects read and judged written trial summaries presented as joined or single trials. In study one, joinder resulted in higher rates of conviction and in confusion of evidence. In study two, the conviction results were replicated, and subjects judging joined trials also rated the evidence as more incriminating and made negative attributions about the defendant. These ratings were strongly related to judgments of guilt. A sequential judgment process was also found to affect jurors' judgments. Tables, footnotes, and 31 references are provided. (Author abstract modified)
Downloads
Similar Publications
- Forced Condensation of Cyanoacrylate With Temperature Control of the Evidence Surface To Modify Polymer Formation and Improve Fingerprint Visualization
- Improving the Management of Rental Properties With Drug Problems: A Randomized Experiment (From Civil Remedies and Crime Prevention, P 161-185, 1998, Lorraine Green Mazerolle and Jan Roehl, eds. - See NCJ-175510)
- Production and Consumption of Research in Police Agencies in the United States