How Well Do Jurors Reason? Competence Dimensions of Individual Variation in a Juror Reasoning Task

Deanna Kuhn · Michael P. Weinstock · Robin A. Flaton

103 citations0/0 files storedPsychological Science

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

Significant individual variation is observed in how people reason as jurors At the satisficing end of a continuum we identify, the juror draws on evidence selectively to construct a single story of what happened, with no acknowledgment of discrepant evidence or alternative possibilities A contrasting theory-evidence coordination mode of processing entails construction of multiple theories (story-verdict constellations) that are evaluated against the evidence and against alternatives Individual differences influence task outcome, the satisficing mode being associated with more extreme verdict choices and very high certainty

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 — 103 citations exist upstream.

References

1990The case for motivated reasoning.1991The Skills of Argument 2006Thinking and Deciding 1981Can human irrationality be experimentally demonstrated?1999Everyday Cognition: Development in Social Context 1989Children and adults as intuitive scientists.1986Practical intelligence : nature and origins of competence in the everyday world 2012Informal Reasoning and Education

Cited by

2022Predictors and consequences of intellectual humility 2008Beyond control of variables: What needs to develop to achieve skilled scientific thinking?2007Cognitive ability, thinking dispositions, and instructional set as predictors of critical thinking 2004Role of epistemological understanding and interest in interpreting a controversy and in topic-specific belief change 1999Differential Use of Person Information in Decisions about Guilt Versus Innocence: The Role of Implicit Theories 2001Science on the Web: Student Evaluations of Scientific Arguments

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.