effects of the unanimity requirement on group decision processes in simulated juries

Effects of the unanimity requirement on group decision processes in simulated juries by Valerie P. Hans Download PDF EPUB FB2

The effect of the unanimity requirement on group decision processes in simulated juries. Unpublished doctoral disser-tation, University of Toronto. The psychology of the courtroom. Kaplan and Miller () examined the effects of group decision rule (unanimity versus majority) and type of damage award (compensatory versus punitive) on the levels of damages awarded in a personal injury case.

Each of 40 six-person groups engaged in a mock jury trial, with 10 groups assigned to each of the 2 (decision rule) × 2 (damage type) cells of a factorial by: 5. For discussion of the origins of the unanimity requirement, see Apodaca v V.

The effects of the unanimity requirement on group decision processes in simulated juries. Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto. Google Scholar Vidmar N.

() Six versus Twelve, All versus Some. In: Judging the Jury. Springer, Boston, : Valerie P. Hans, Neil Vidmar. The present study focuses on group processes in simulated jury decisions about complex issues such as those typically faced by trial juries. Employing Davis' Social Decision Scheme theory, it was.

IOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOL () The Effects of Consensus Requirements and Multiple Decisions on Mock Juror Verdict Preferences JAMES H. DAVIS University of'lllinois ROBERT W.

HOLT George Mason University CRAIG E. SPITZER Quaker Oats Company AND GAROLD STASSER Miami UniversiA Received After watching a simulated rape trial, Cited by:   This paper investigates the rationality of group decisions versus individual decisions under risk.

We study two group decision rules, majority and unanimity, in stochastic dominance and Allais paradox tasks. We distinguish communication effects (the effects of group discussions and interactions) from aggregation effects (mere impact of the voting procedure), which makes it possible.

Order effects in multiple decisions by groups: A demonstrations with mock juries and trial procedures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, both to earlier results that support a contrast explanation of such order effects and to the influence of task order on group decision processes in general.

However, there are a number of social forces that can hinder effective group decision making, which can sometimes lead groups to show process losses.

Some group process losses are the result of groupthink—when a group, as result of a flawed group process and strong conformity pressures, makes a poor judgment.

if a 6 person jury is used, the verdict must be unanimous. 26 states now require unanimity in misdemeanor verdicts. 44 require it in criminal felony trials. unanimity is always required in capital murder trials. Selection of Jury Foreperson.

the leader of the jury. this person may be more of a moderator organizer. Foss, R. Group decision processes in the simulated jury. Sociometry, 39, The present study focuses on group processes in simulated jury decisions about complex issues such as those typically faced by trial juries.

Supporters and critics of the unanimity requirement have debated its merits by drawing on history and precedent,17 but they have grounded much of their disagreement on conflicting claims about how the various decision rules are likely to affect jurors, jury deliberations, and jury verdicts.

Per. Juries are a unique type of social group with strong, bidirectional influence processes in which the individual juror influences the group and the jury influences the individual. Many studies of mock juries focus on either the jurors or the jury as a unit of analysis, thereby failing to examine the bidirectional aspect of decision making.

The only study we know of that includes prolonged, live group discussion and a unanimity requirement for the final group decision (as juries usually do) found that mock jurors with higher NFC (i.e., who are more inclined to focus on central information) talked more and were perceived as more persuasive than their lower NFC counterparts.

This. In Jury Decision Making Dennis J. Devine examines over 50 years of research on juries and offers a “big picture” overview of the field. The volume summarizes existing theories of jury decision making and identifies what we have learned about jury behavior, including the effects of specific courtroom practices, the nature of the trial, the.

Gillespie, John 5/11/ For Educational Use Only Ramos v. Louisiana, WL () © Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Social science research conducted on the impact of jury unanimity raises questions about the Justices’ assumptions about how non-unanimous decision rules would affect the functioning of the jury.

Recent certiorari petitions have pressed the Court to reconsider the jury unanimity issue in light of changing Sixth Amendment jurisprudence and the social science evidence. Jury decision-making has implications for psychological research.

Psychological research has implications for jury-decision making. Leading jury and decision-making researchers recently discussed how psychological science can examine individual and group decision. Jury Size and Decision Rule Both the size of the jury and the number of jurors who must be in agreement for a verdict to be concluded (the group’s “social decision rule”) have been the subject of litigation at the U.S.

Supreme Court as well as a subject of research by psychologists and other social and behavioral scientists. The U.S. Supreme Court's decision that racial diversity may be a criterion in admissions to colleges and universities was Research on the effects of group deliberation by a jury suggests that.

According to the text, simulated juries. the courtroom is a miniature social world where people think about and influence each other. From. Experimental Research on Jury Decision-Making ROBERT J.

MACCOUN Because trial juries deliberate in secrecy, legal debates about jury functioning have relied heavily on anecdote and speculation.

In recent years, investigators have begun to challenge many common assumptions about jury be- havior. 19 But, again, it concluded sans evidence that a jury of six could as easily meet these goals as a group of "12–particularly if the requirement of unanimity is retained." 20 The Court then added, "And, certainly the reliability of the jury as a factfinder hardly seems likely to be a .The effects of jury size and of unanimous vs.

non­ unanimous verdict requirements were studied through analysis of work juries considering evidence frcm two criminal cases. At least five juries were tested under each of the eight combinations of conditions. Measures of individual judgment and jury group interaction were obtained.Participative decision-making (PDM) is the extent to which employers allow or encourage employees to share or participate in organizational decision-making (Probst, ).

According to Cotton et al. (), the format of PDM could be formal or addition, the degree of participation could range from zero to % in different participative management (PM) stages (Cotton et al.