Educative Expert Testimony: A One–Two Punch Can Affect Jurors' Decisions

Narina L. Nunez · Jennifer M. Gray · Julie A. Buck

8 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Applied Social Psychology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Jury Decision Making Processes Legal processes and jurisprudence Deception detection and forensic psychology

Abstract

The present research examined whether different types of educative expert testimony can increase mock jurors' knowledge of problems associated with hearsay witnesses and decrease guilty verdicts. Studies 1 (N = 304 college students) and 2 (N = 196 college students) varied the length and types of expert testimony in a trial transcript. While all types of expert testimony did inform mock jurors' knowledge, guilty verdicts decreased when multiple problems with hearsay were presented. The length of the testimony had no effect on verdict. The results suggest that experts who present multiple problems with hearsay testimony are more likely to impact guilty decisions than is no expert or an expert who presents only one problem.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.

References

1999Dual-process theories in social psychology 1981Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches 1984The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion.1999The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out?1993The effects of complainant age and expert psychological testimony in a simulated child sexual abuse trial.1996“It Sounds Good in Theory, But...”: Do Investigative Interviewers Follow Guidelines Based on Memory Research?1993Unequal Justice: The Prosecution of Child Sexual Abuse 1997Does expert psychological testimony inform or influence juror decision making? A social cognitive analysis.

Cited by

2016Juror sensitivity to false confession risk factors: Dispositional vs. situational attributions for a confession.

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.