| Description |
In a role-playing study, 160 subjects were asked to pretend they were jurors, read a summary of evidence from a trial, and decide how likely it was the defendant was guilty. The case summaries varied with respect to admissibility of controversial evidence, kind of evidence, and nature of judge's instructions to the jurors. In addition to measuring juror judgments of guilt, measures of confidence were included; to assess how the variables affected the confidence subjects felt in making their judgment. It was found that both admissibility and evidence played an important role in the decision-making process. The specificity of the judge's instructions proved important only for those subjects able to recall the type of evidence which was ruled as admissible by the judge. |
