Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

Relationships Between Support for the Death Penalty and Cognitive Processing

16 references·4 citing·38 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

1999Dual-process theories in social psychology6,102 cited
1984The Efficient Assessment of Need for Cognition2,911 cited
1996Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition.2,517 cited
1996Individual differences in intuitive-experiential and analytical-rational thinking styles.1,927 cited
1982The simulation heuristic1,586 cited
1973The self-concept revisited: Or a theory of a theory.1,289 cited
1999The relation of rational and experiential information processing styles to personality, basic beliefs, and the ratio-bias phenomenon.1,252 cited
2013The Construction of Social Judgments925 cited
1999The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out?682 cited
2001Jury decision making: 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups.525 cited
1986Set/reset: Use and disuse of concepts in impression formation.466 cited
1992Irrational reactions to negative outcomes: Evidence for two conceptual systems.410 cited
1990Counterfactual Thinking and Social Perception: Thinking about What Might Have Been221 cited
2011Mock Jury Research: Where Do We Go from Here?141 cited
2010Age and gender differences in preferences for rational and experiential thinking

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

123 cited

2004Exploring the effects of attitudes toward the death penalty on capital sentencing verdicts.105 cited

Cited by

2016Capital-izing Jurors: How Death Qualification Relates to Jury Composition, Jurors’ Perceptions, and Trial Outcomes23 cited
2018Death penalty decision‐making: Fundamentalist beliefs and the evaluation of aggravating and mitigating circumstances18 cited
2018What Makes Race Salient? Juror Decision-Making in Same-Race Versus Cross-Race Identification Scenarios and the Influence of Expert Testimony12 cited
2020How mock jurors’ cognitive processing and defendants’ immigrant status and ethnicity relate to decisions in capital trials12 cited