國立虎尾科技大學 |

Receptivity of Capital Jurors to Mitigating Evidence of Abuse, Expert Witness Testimony of Mental Illness, and a Presence of Guilt and Remorse : = Examining the Impact of Bias.

Record Type:	Language materials, manuscript : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Receptivity of Capital Jurors to Mitigating Evidence of Abuse, Expert Witness Testimony of Mental Illness, and a Presence of Guilt and Remorse :/
Reminder of title:	Examining the Impact of Bias.
Author:	Smith, Brianna J.
Description:	1 online resource (112 pages)
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-12, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International84-12A.
Subject:	Psychology. -
Online resource:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798379596507

Receptivity of Capital Jurors to Mitigating Evidence of Abuse, Expert Witness Testimony of Mental Illness, and a Presence of Guilt and Remorse : = Examining the Impact of Bias.
Smith, Brianna J.

Receptivity of Capital Jurors to Mitigating Evidence of Abuse, Expert Witness Testimony of Mental Illness, and a Presence of Guilt and Remorse :Examining the Impact of Bias. - 1 online resource (112 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-12, Section: A.

Thesis (Psy.D.)--Alliant International University, 2023.

Includes bibliographical references

This study looked at the influence of juror bias on receptivity to a defendant's history of abuse, mental illness presented via expert witness testimony, and presence of guilt and remorse presented as mitigating evidence during the sentencing phase of a capital trial. A total of 118 participants, who met the requirements to sit on a capital offense jury in the United States courts system, partook in this study. Participants completed a death-qualifying questionnaire to ensure they met criteria for participation as a mock capital juror. For those that met inclusion criteria, the participants then completed a demographic's questionnaire, a pre-trial juror attitudes questionnaire to examine bias, and read three vignettes. Participants were prompted to read each vignette as if they were a capital juror in the sentencing phase of a capital offense trial and decide on a life without the possibility of parole sentence or a death sentence. It was hypothesized that pre-trial pro-defense and pro-prosecution biases would be associated with receptivity to certain mitigating factors and, ultimately, influence sentencing outcomes. Chi-Square tests were utilized to examine any associations. Primary analyses demonstrated no significant association between pre-trial pro-prosecution or pro-defense biases and sentencing outcomes. However, exploratory analyses indicated significant associations between gender, income, level of education and sentencing decisions. This was most prominently seen in sentencing decisions on the first vignette, depicting expert psychological testimony as a mitigating factor. These findings suggest that expert psychological testimony is best received by a jury when physical, concrete evidence of a defendant's mental illness or impairment is included in their testimony. The information obtained provides the legal system with tools to use during voire dire, the preliminary examination of a witness or a juror by a judge or counsel, which is arguably the most important part of a trial, especially when the sentencing outcome is the difference between life and death.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798379596507Subjects--Topical Terms:

555998
Psychology.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Juror biasIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

Receptivity of Capital Jurors to Mitigating Evidence of Abuse, Expert Witness Testimony of Mental Illness, and a Presence of Guilt and Remorse : = Examining the Impact of Bias.
LDR:03629ntm a22004217 4500 001 1143310
005 20240517100401.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 250605s2023 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798379596507
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI30489022
035 $a AAI30489022
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Smith, Brianna J. $3 1467953
245 1 0 $a Receptivity of Capital Jurors to Mitigating Evidence of Abuse, Expert Witness Testimony of Mental Illness, and a Presence of Guilt and Remorse : $b Examining the Impact of Bias.
264 0 $c 2023
300 $a 1 online resource (112 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-12, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Stolberg, Ronald.
502 $a Thesis (Psy.D.)--Alliant International University, 2023.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a This study looked at the influence of juror bias on receptivity to a defendant's history of abuse, mental illness presented via expert witness testimony, and presence of guilt and remorse presented as mitigating evidence during the sentencing phase of a capital trial. A total of 118 participants, who met the requirements to sit on a capital offense jury in the United States courts system, partook in this study. Participants completed a death-qualifying questionnaire to ensure they met criteria for participation as a mock capital juror. For those that met inclusion criteria, the participants then completed a demographic's questionnaire, a pre-trial juror attitudes questionnaire to examine bias, and read three vignettes. Participants were prompted to read each vignette as if they were a capital juror in the sentencing phase of a capital offense trial and decide on a life without the possibility of parole sentence or a death sentence. It was hypothesized that pre-trial pro-defense and pro-prosecution biases would be associated with receptivity to certain mitigating factors and, ultimately, influence sentencing outcomes. Chi-Square tests were utilized to examine any associations. Primary analyses demonstrated no significant association between pre-trial pro-prosecution or pro-defense biases and sentencing outcomes. However, exploratory analyses indicated significant associations between gender, income, level of education and sentencing decisions. This was most prominently seen in sentencing decisions on the first vignette, depicting expert psychological testimony as a mitigating factor. These findings suggest that expert psychological testimony is best received by a jury when physical, concrete evidence of a defendant's mental illness or impairment is included in their testimony. The information obtained provides the legal system with tools to use during voire dire, the preliminary examination of a witness or a juror by a judge or counsel, which is arguably the most important part of a trial, especially when the sentencing outcome is the difference between life and death.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Psychology. $3 555998
650 4 $a Law. $3 671705
650 4 $a Mental health. $3 564038
650 4 $a Criminology. $3 563146
653 $a Juror bias
653 $a Capital punishment
653 $a Expert psychological testimony
653 $a Mitigation
653 $a Mock jury
653 $a PJAQ
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0621
690 $a 0398
690 $a 0347
690 $a 0627
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a Alliant International University. $b San Diego, CSPP. $3 1182757
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 84-12A.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30489022 $z click for full text (PQDT)