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
- Habeas Litigation in U.S. District Courts: An Empirical Study of Habeas Corpus Cases Filed by State Prisoners Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Final Technical Report
- Use of Electronic Monitoring in the United States: 1989 Update
- Joint Research Partnership for Community Oriented Policing Saint Louis University and the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department: Final Report