How Well Do Jurors Reason? Competence Dimensions of Individual Variation in a Juror Reasoning Task
- 1 September 1994
- journal article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Psychological Science
- Vol. 5 (5) , 289-296
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00628.x
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 certaintyKeywords
This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- The story model for juror decision makingPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,1993
- Cross-Domain Development of Scientific ReasoningCognition and Instruction, 1992
- Prototypes in the courtroom: Lay representations of legal concepts.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1991
- The Skills of ArgumentPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,1991
- The case for motivated reasoning.Psychological Bulletin, 1990
- Approaches to studying formal and everyday reasoning.Psychological Bulletin, 1989
- Children and adults as intuitive scientists.Psychological Review, 1989
- Rationality and IntelligencePublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,1985
- Postprimary education has little impact on informal reasoning.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1985
- Can human irrationality be experimentally demonstrated?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1981