Jury Decision Making Articles

Bordens, K. S., and Horowitz, I. A. (1998). The limits of sampling and consolidation in mass tort trials: Justice improved or justice altered? Law and Psychology Review, 22, 43-66.

Bornstein, B. H. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75-91.

Costanzo, M., and Costanzo, S. (1992). Jury decision making in the capital penalty phase: Legal assumptions, empirical finding, and a research agenda. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 185-201.

Feigenson, N. (2000). Legal blame: How jurors think and talk about accidents. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Greene, E., Downey, C., and Goodman-Delahunty, J. (1999). Juror decisions about damages in employement discrimination cases. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 17, 107-121.

Greene, E., and Loftus, E. F. (1998). Psychological research on jury damage awards. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7, 50-54.

Hastie, R.(Ed.). (1993). Inside the juror: The psychology of juror decision making. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Hastie, R., Schkade, D. A., and Payne, J. W. (1999). Juror judgments in civil cases: Effects of plaintiff's requests and plaintiff's identity on punitive damage awards. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 445-470.

Heuer, L., and Penrod, S. (1994). Juror notetaking and question asking during trials: A national field experiment. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 121-150.

Horowitz, I. A., FostorLee, L., and Brolly, I. (1996). Effects of trial complexity on decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 757-768.

Kerr, N. L., Hymes, R. W., Anderson, A. B., and Weathers, J. E. (1995). Defendant-juror similarity and mock juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 545-567.

Kerr, N. L., and MacCoun, R. J. (1985). The effects of jury size and polling method on the process and product of jury deliberation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 349-363.

Marti, M. W., and Wissler, R. L. (2000). Be careful what you ask for: The effect of anchors on personal-injury damages award. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6, 91-103.

MacCoun, R. J., and Kerr, N. L. (1988). Asymmetric influence in mock jury deliberation: Jurors' bias for leniency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 21-33.

Niedermeier, K. E., Horowitz, I. A., and Kerr, N. L. (1999). Informing jurors of their nullification power: A route to a just verdict of judicial chaos? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 331-351.

Nunez, N., McCoy, M. L., Clark, H. L., and Shaw, L. A. (1999). The testimony of elderly victim/witnesses and their impact on juror decisions: The importance of examining multiple stereotypes. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 413-423.

Penrod, S. D. (1990). Predictors of jury decision making in criminal and civil cases: A field experiment. Forensic Reports, 3, 261-277.

Saks, M. J., Hollinger, L. A., Wissler, R. L., Evans, D. L., et al. (1997). Reducing variability in civil jury awards. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 243-256.

Saks, M. J., and Marti, M. W. (1997). A meta-analysis of the effects of jury size. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 451-467.

Shaw, J. I., and Skolnick, P. (1995). Effects of prohibitive and informative judicial instructions on jury decision making. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 23, 319-325.

Smith, V. L., and Kassin, S. M. (1992). Effects of the dynamite charge on the deliberations of deadlocked mock juries. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 625-643.