Inducing jurors to disregard inadmissible evidence: A legal explanation does not help.
- 1 January 1995
- journal article
- Published by American Psychological Association (APA) in Law and Human Behavior
- Vol. 19 (4) , 407-424
- https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01499140
Abstract
Three experiments investigated mock jurors' ability to disregard inadmissible prior conviction evidence and hearsay. In Experiments 1 and 2, college students listened to an audiotape enacting a theft trial. The critical evidence favored the prosecution and was objected to by the defense. In three different conditions the judge either ruled the evidence admissible, ruled it inadmissible, or ruled it inadmissible and explained the legal basis for the ruling. In a fourth condition no critical evidence was presented. The critical witness' credibility was also manipulated. With prior conviction evidence but not hearsay the legal explanation “backfired.” In addition, the critical witness' credibility did not affect subjects' ability to disregard inadmissible evidence. The results of Experiment 3 suggest that the legal explanation may have affected the use of hearsay and prior conviction evidence differently because of subjects' dissimilar preconceptions of the fairness of using the two evidence items to assess guilt.Keywords
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- How Well Do Jurors Reason? Competence Dimensions of Individual Variation in a Juror Reasoning TaskPsychological Science, 1994
- Evaluation and integration of eyewitness reports.Law and Human Behavior, 1993
- When prior knowledge and law collide: Helping jurors use the law.Law and Human Behavior, 1993
- Real jurors' understanding of the law in real cases.Law and Human Behavior, 1992
- Can Jurors Understand Probabilistic Evidence?Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society, 1991
- Are Juries Competent to Evaluate Statistical Evidence?Law and Contemporary Problems, 1989
- On the inefficacy of limiting instructions: When jurors use prior conviction evidence to decide on guilt.Law and Human Behavior, 1985
- The Direct and Indirect Effects of Inadmissible Evidence1Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1983
- Inadmissible evidence and juror verdicts.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1981
- Effects of inadmissible Evidence on the Decisions of Simulated Jurors: A Moral DilemmaJournal of Applied Social Psychology, 1973