Nominal and interactive groups: Effects of preinstruction and deliberations on decisions and evidence recall in complex trials.

Martin J. Bourgeois · Irwin A. Horowitz · Lynne ForsterLee · Jon E. Grahe

29 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Applied 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 Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Abstract

Two studies assessed the effects of preinstruction on decision making in simulated civil trials. In Study 1, substantive instructions were presented before the evidence, after the evidence, before and after the evidence, or not at all to nominal jurors who did not deliberate and to interactive jurors who did deliberate. Preinstructed nominal jurors differentiated among the plaintiffs in awarding damages, whereas postinstructed nominal and interactive jurors did not. Group discussion and preinstruction augmented damage awards and improved recall of evidence only for preinstructed jurors. Study 2 suggested that substantive preinstruction engaged a proplaintiff bias when trial evidence was technically difficult but enhanced systematic processing when the evidence was presented in less complex language.

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 — 29 citations exist upstream.

References

1981Psychology of Group Influence 1980Progress in social psychology 1987Getting Inside the Black Box: Toward A Better Understanding of Civil Jury Behavior

Cited by

2009Predicting guilt judgments and verdict change using a measure of pretrial bias in a videotaped mock trial with deliberating jurors 2000Instructing jurors on general damages in personal injury cases: Problems and possibilities.2017Keep your bias to yourself: How deliberating with differently biased others affects mock-jurors’ guilt decisions, perceptions of the defendant, memories, and evidence interpretation.2001When Juries Fail to Comply with the Law: Biased Evidence Processing in Individual and Group Decision Making 2015The impact of note taking style and note availability at retrieval on mock jurors’ recall and recognition of trial information 2001Procedural Mechanisms and Jury Behavior 1999The Plaintiff Bias in Mock Civil Jury Decision Making: Consensus Requirements, Information Format and Amount of Consensus

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.