Homework Feedback
3.2.1: Physical Attractiveness:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Mention the theory first.
Results: Mention the attractiveness of the plaintiff and the defendant.
Remember plaintiff not victim
Focus on the opposite levels of attraction: 41% vs 83%
Halo Effect: more attractive- less guilt verdicts, missing the assumptions made
about the person.
Proves, supports, shows, demonstrates.
Conclusion ‘physical attractiveness had an effect on jury verdict.’ be explicit what
effect.
Key words: assumptions, cognitive bias, impression formation, Halo Effect, Asch,
Dion.
Homework Feedback
3.2.2: Confidence:
•
•
•
•
Remember Penrod and Culter’s study was on…. Confidence and the % of
convictions.
The follow up investigation by Culter looked at whether confidence was a good
predictor of accuracy. It was great if you included this as it links to the assumption
that if someone is confident they are accurate, but remember it is a different study
and wasn’t part of the original study.
Key words: assumptions, cognitive bias, impression formation, Halo Effect, Asch.
(SAME as 3.2.1)
Research: AM PP FC
Homework Feedback
3.2.3: Shields and videotapes:
Background:
• open court: can see the emotions of the child = more empathetic= increase conviction rate
or
• being behind a shield or on a videotape: implies that the child needs protection= more
empathetic = increase conviction rate.
• Mention ethics explicitly when saying how it is good that this happens in trials to safeguard
the children.
• An issue with children giving evidence in general is their susceptibility to leading questions
and situations, This might be evident if they were in a courtroom with the defendant.
(Loftus)
Research:
• Important to mention the second part of the study.
• They controlled for variables and isolated the variable of interest which was the manner in
which the child gave their testimony.
• Mention actors were used.
• The first part was not statistically supported.
Homework Feedback
In General:
• Try and use paragraphs
• Fluency is great- but there’s room to make our sentences more concise.
• Link to topic & application at the end.
Eg: Shields: Therefore the closer the child is to the defendant the higher the
conviction rate was. This presents a challenge when applying these finding to
a courtroom setting as placing a child in the courtroom might not ethical,
however it might have a great chance of a conviction.
• Make sure this is in your own words. Not much point copying from your
textbook.
What to do now?
• Read your work, did you make these mistakes, did you
include all the relevant key terms.
• Re-read your work and highlight the key points.
Are you repeating yourself?
Remember you have to write:
4 x 15markers & 4 x 10 markers in the exam, we want to ensure
that we are using EVERY minute wisely.
Homework:
• name: (computer)
• time started- time finished
• pen colour- Change if you are using your
notes.
• questions down the bottom.
Witness
Appeal
Reaching
a Verdict
Attractiveness
(Castellow/Dion Theory)
Witness Confidence
(Penrod & Cutler)
Shields and videotaping
(Ross et. al).
Reaching
a Verdict
Decision making (Hastie)
Majority Influence (Asch)
Minority Influence
(Moscovici)
3.3.1 Reaching a Verdict
• Stages and influences on decision making (Hastie 1983);
• Majority influence (Asch 1953);
• Minority influence (Moscovici 1976, 1980, 1985).
Terminology:
Unanimous verdict: 12:0
Majority: 10:2
Hung verdict: not a clear majority
Court
At start of trial
Minimum number
Majorities allowed
Crown Court
12
9
11-1, 10-2, 10-1, 9-1
High Court
12
9
11-1, 10-2, 10-1, 9-1
County Court
8
7
7-1
Coroner's
Court
between 7 and 11 —
Minority no more than 2
Background:
Stages and influences on decision making (Hastie 1983)
Orientation Period
Open
Confrontation
Reconciliation
Attempts to smooth over
conflicts
Different opinions arise
Explore different
interpretations
Fierce debate
Focus on details
Pressure on the minority
to conform
Raise questions and
explore facts
Relaxed and open
discussion
Support for the group
decision is established
Set the agenda
Tension released through
humour.
Background:
Stages and influences on decision making (Hastie 1983)
Orientation Stage
Open Confrontation Reconciliation
Relaxed and open
discussion
Fierce debate
Attempts to smooth over
conflicts
Set the agenda
Focus on details
Tension released through
humour.
Raise questions and
explore facts
Explore different
interpretations
Different opinions arise
Pressure on the minority to
conform
Support for the group
decision is established
Can we study real cases?
• How likely are you to share your ideas in a jury room if you
knew it wasn’t confidential? (media, defendant, plaintiff,
psychology experiment)
• Confidential and the safety of the juniors is vital.
• The problem for researchers is that juries are sworn to secrecy
about the deliberations, which take place behind closed doors, even
after the trial, they are prohibited by law from discussing it.
• So we use mock trials and analyse quantitative data that is in the
public domain.
What factors might affect a jury’s decision making?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
group size of the jury,
people in the jury
pre-trial publicity,
ethnicity,
gender,
individual differences,
how the votes are being cast.
social processes: majority influences.
social processes: minority influences.
Research:
Stages and influences on decision making (Hastie 1983)
• In _____% of cases the jury will decide in the direction
of the initial majority.
• Hung juries usually result only when there is significant
____factions at the beginning of deliberations.
• Decision making time ____with case complexity.
• Jury discussions are/are not usually contentious.
• The research shaped the background.
Evaluation
• Issues: LEE’S QQ
• Debates: DRNIPUE
• Methods: COVERS
BACKGROUND/RESEARCH
Strengths
Weaknesses
Checklist: Forensics
1 minute- key word plan
10 minutes to write
“Describe the stages of jury decision making when
researching a verdict. [10]
Different coloured pen please. No notes and with notes
MINORITY VS MAJORITY
•
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqDd06GW76o
What stage are they in?
Why might people conform to the majority?
Why might people conform to the minority?
3.3: Reaching a Verdict
• Stages and influences on decision making (Hastie 1983);
• Majority influence (Asch 1953);
occurs when the majority establishes a norm and gets the minority to move to the
position of the majority.
• Minority influence (Moscovici 1976, 1980, 1985).
occurs when a minority rejects the established norm of the majority of group
members and gets the majority to move to the position of the minority.
The elevator experiment
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgRoiTW
kBHU
• What factors influence conformity?
Majority influence (Asch 1953)
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYIh4Mk
cfJA
Majority Influence: Background
Factors the effect conformity
Group Size:
↑ group size (4+)= Conformity ↑
Anonymous
↑ Anonymity= Conformity↓
Why: ↓ group pressure & normative influence = no fear of rejection from the group.
Being Anonymous:
Rank the following methods of giving a verdict:
• show of hands
• verbally going around the room
• secret written ballot
Majority Influence: Background
Factors the effect conformity
Distortion of Perception: (Informational Influence)
Thought the wrong answers were right. Believed that the other members must have
knowledge that they didn’t.
Distortion of Judgement: they felt doubt about the accuracy- conformed with group.
Distortion of Action: (Normative Influence) didn’t want to be ridiculed and went along
with the group. Highlights our need to belong and our concerned regarding what people
think of us. Peer pressure to confirm.
Majority influence (Asch 1953)
A:
M:
P:
P:
F:
C:
• KEY WORDS:
Evaluation
• Issues: LEE’S QQ
• Debates: DRNIPUE
• Methods: COVERS
BACKGROUND
Strengths
Weaknesses
RESEARCH
Strengths
Weaknesses
Checklist: Forensics
1 minute- key word plan
10 minutes to write
Complete: Background
“How might the view of the majority influence a jury when reaching a verdict.” [10]
Bullet Point: Research
“Describe research into how the majority influences a jury when reaching a verdict.” [10]
3.3: Reaching a Verdict
• Stages and influences on decision making (Hastie 1983);
• Majority influence (Asch 1953);
• Minority influence (Moscovici 1976, 1980, 1985).
Minority influence: Background
Minority influence occurs when a minority rejects the established norm of the
majority of group members and gets the majority to move to the position of the
minority.
Informational Influence
Others might be swayed because they believe the minority is better informed
than they are (informational influence).
When the minority is influential is will override the following factors:
Group Size:
Normative Influence: Social Support
Unanimity: will still remain
• When participants were allowed to answer in private = conformity decreases.
Less groups pressure and normative influence = no fear of rejection from the
group.
Majority Influence: Background
Factors the effect conformity
Minority Influence
• Moscovici carried out a set of experiments to test the minority influence.
• He got groups of six participants (four naïve & 2 stooges) to make colour
perception judgements about a series of slides which were all blue.
• In the first condition his stooges declared the slides were all green.
• In the second condition two-thirds of the slides were declared green.
• In the final condition, the stooges were completely inconsistent in their
choices.
• Results showed that was a 32% conformity only in the first condition.
• Why?
Minority Influence
• Moscovici believes that it is the consistency of the minority which is
persuasive.
• Consistency creates an impression of certainty and confidence, and its
uncompromising attitude includes everyone else to take it seriously – in
this case people were persuaded to see blue as green.