YEAR	JUDGE AND JURY	AUTHOR	SOURCE	SELECTION	ABSTRACT
2009	Voir Dire-an art in search of a science	Vicky Campagna PhD	psychology journal	8012	Voir dire, that phase of a trial when prospective jurors are theoretically examined by both attorneys to ensure their impartiality, has been considered to be pivotal to a successful verdict. In this article, the current state of voir dire is examined, and the current state of the trial consultant s role in litigation is reviewed.
2009	Mock jurors' judgments about opposing scientific experts-Do cross-examination deliberation and need for cognition matter?	Jesica Salerno MA Michelle McCauley PhD	psychology journal	8000	The purpose of this study was to determine how cross-examination affects jurors judgments in a case with opposing experts who differ in quality and whether it might be especially helpful for jurors who are less motivated to process information thoroughly (i.e., low need for cognition or NFC). Fifty-five college students listened to a civil trial that included testimony from one high- and one low-quality expert. Half heard cross-examination of both experts, half heard no cross-examination. Participants completed verdicts and ratings of defendant culpability and expert quality before and after deliberating in juries. Culpability ratings were more in support of the high-quality expert after deliberation (compared to pre-deliberation), but this effect was significantly stronger for lower (versus higher) NFC jurors. Furthermore, this interaction was stronger when the jurors did not have the benefit of cross-examination. The cross-examination effect was mediated by quality ratings of the low-quality (but not the high-quality) expert. In practice, this means that cross-examination affects jurors judgments, especially for jurors less motivated to process testimony thoroughly, by helping jurors recognize a flawed expert witness.
2009	Dissonance reduction in jurors' post-verdict decisions	Dario Rodriguez MD Melissa Berry PhD	psychology journal	8002	Dissonance reduction in jurors post-verdict decisions was investigated using a mock juror paradigm. Participants were expected to experience dissonance after making a difficult verdict decision in a rape trial. As predicted, those who read an ambiguous crime scenario and then voted guilty tried to reduce their dissonance by adding consonant cognitions (i.e., convincing themselves they made the right decision); they rated the crime as more severe and recommended harsher sentences than participants who read a clearly guilty control scenario. However, this effect was observed only for men. Trial bifurcation effectively eliminated the dissonance effect. The prediction that those who voted not guilty would reduce dissonance via trivialization resulting in decreased ratings of crime severity was not supported. Implications and future directions are discussed.
2008	What influences jurors' evaluation of DNA evidence	Dennis Devine PhD	psychology journal	10790	Previous research suggests jurors reaction to DNA evidence may be influenced by both contextual and dispositional variables. In this study, undergraduate students and venirepersons showing up for jury duty completed several individual-difference measures related to DNA (e.g., familiarity, objective knowledge, skepticism) and rated the general importance of 20 contextual variables that could influence their evaluation of DNA evidence. Most contextual variables were rated as moderately to considerably important in both samples, although venirepersons tended to rate the contextual influences as more important than students. DNA-related objective knowledge and skepticism were both significantly related to mean importance rating. This study highlights variables that may be important in trials that hinge on DNA evidence, and suggests variables worthy of future experimental research.
2008	Juror verdict predicted from a four-item Voir Dire question battery	R Edward Geiselman PhD, Michael Keesler Michelle Emrani Jae Yu	psychiatry journal	8105	The Bill of Rights calls for an impartial jury, yet few, if any, legal scholars believe jurors approach their duty as blank slates. A flurry of mock-jury simulations and field studies of actual juries appeared throughout the 1970s, 1980s, and early 1990s in an attempt to isolate measures of a priori juror bias. To summarize the findings, personality characteristics have produced limited reliability as predictors of juror sentiment and verdict. Instead, consideration of complex interactions between personality variables and case-specific factors seems to be required for adequately predicting juror verdict. In addition, personality variables have been found to be more reliable predictors of juror decisions when the case evidence is more equivocal ( close calls ).
2007	Influence of media messages on mock juror decisions in the Andrea Yates trial	Kristine Jacquin PhD Erica Hodges	psychology journal	7011	Previous research suggests that jurors may be biased by pretrial media portrayals of the defendant. The media gag-order preceding the Andrea Yates trial provided an opportunity to empirically examine this bias in an actual case. Mock jurors (N = 488 college students of voting age) were randomly assigned to a no media condition or to an unbiased, sympathetic, or unsympathetic media condition. Participants were given facts of the case and likely prosecution and defense arguments. Jurors who read the unsympathetic media portrayal of Yates were significantly more likely than jurors in the other media conditions to find her guilty and to impose a harsh sentence. Media messages also influenced attitudes about postpartum depression and mentally ill offenders.
2005	Investigating the consequences of administering a standardized pretrial juror bias assessment	Dustin Morris Len Lecci PhD	psychology journal	9005	Participants were met by the experimenter and brought to a small room that housed a computer, a desk, and a chair... Below you will read a brief synopsis of a criminal case. After reading that synopsis, you will be given further instructions regarding the completion of a computer task. Please read the case synopsis and subsequent directions very carefully. Shortly before noon on December 1, 1998, two men wearing ski masks and carrying handguns walked into First Republic Bank and committed an armed robbery. They were seen leaving the bank on foot heading north. Approximately 15 minutes after receiving the radio call in his car about the robbery, a local police officer pulled into a nearby apartment complex to look for anything suspicious. As he was pulling in, he passed a car carrying four black males coming out of the complex....The present investigation examines whether the administration of a standardized measure of pretrial bias affects verdicts, verdict confidence, and the selection and evaluation of evidence in a computerized trial. The literature on semantic priming suggests that pretrial juror assessments could function as primes for the very biases they purport to assess. However, the present findings, based on a sample of 147 college students, indicate that the administration of a standardized pretrial juror bias measure has no effect on trial relevant events. This suggests that standardized juror bias assessments can continue to be used in jury research, and could be more readily employed in actual trial settings
2005	Expert witnesses: perceptions of eligible jurors	James Griffith PhD	psychology journal	9007	The use of expert witnesses in courtroom proceedings has become commonplace in the American judicial system. Experts from a large variety of fields are called upon by the courts to assist jurors in understanding information that is beyond the scope of understanding for the typical member of a jury. Unfortunately, limited research exists on pretrial attitudes toward the use of expert witnesses in the courtroom. This study surveyed 1,251 juror eligible adults from 50 states on their attitudes toward the use of expert witnesses in legal proceedings. Comparisons were made across gender and prior jury service. It was found that female participants and individuals with prior jury service exhibited more favorable attitudes toward the use of expert witnesses. The results suggest that pretrial biases toward expert witnesses do exist and should be taken into consideration by the legal team
2004	Victim impact statements and mock juror sentencing: the impact of dehumanizing language on a death qualified sample	Byan Myers PhD D Goodwin R Latter S Winstanley	Psychology article	10327	The case [ Payne v. Tennessee/ Supreme Court] involved Pervis Tyrone Payne, who was sentenced to death for the brutal stabbing of Charisse Christopher, her 2-year-old daughter Lacie-Jo, and her 4-year-old son, Nicholas. Only Nicholas survived the stabbing. On appeal, the defense argued that the statements made during the penalty phase of the trial (that Nicholas was suffering emotionally as a result of the death of his mother and sister) were inflammatory and thus unconstitutional according to Booth v. Maryland. In their decision, the Payne court made it clear that no per se bar is erected on victim impact statements, and that: in the majority of cases, and in this case, victim impact statements serve entirely legitimate purposes Victim impact statements allow relatives of murder victims to speak before the jury, and describe not only their suffering as a result of losing a loved one, but educate jurors as to the personal qualities of the victim.
2004	Victim impact statements and mock juror sentencing-impact of dehumanizing language on a death qualified sample	Bryan Myers PhD	psychology journal	10759	no abstract at this time
2002	Linking juror prejudgment and pretrial publicity knowledge: some methodological considerations	Jack Arbuthnot PhD	psychology journal	1142	Composite Publicity Recall (CPR) scores were used to assess pretrial attitudes in preparation for a change of venue motion. A sample of 118 eligible jurors from central Ohio were asked to recall specific events presented in the media surrounding a highly publicized crime. CPR scores were computed based on their responses to 10 crime-specific questions. Regression analyses indicated that respondents CPR scores were a better predictor of estimates that the defendant committed the crime than were demographic factors, attitudes toward the criminal justice system, their reported familiarity with the case, or the degree to which they discussed the case with others in the community. We advocate computing CPR scores to assess publicity knowledge (rather than publicity awareness), and using regression analyses to best establish the relationship between publicity and prejudgment in a way that identifies their unique contributions.
2002	Effects of expert testimony on mock jurors' decision making and memory	James Griffith PhD	psychology journal	650	This experiment examined the influence of two types of expert testimony (specific and general) on mock jurors decision making and memory of a legal case involving a repressed memory of childhood sexual abuse. Gender differences were found for monetary damages with women awarding more than twice as much as men. Women also remembered more of the trial than did their male counterparts. Additionally, subjects who were exposed to specific expert testimonies were able to recall more than subjects in the general expert testimony condition.
1999	Repressed memories in the courtroom-trial characteristics affecting mock jurors' decision making	James Griffith MA Terry Libkuman PhD	psychology journal	935	Three experiments examined how male and female mock jurors reacted to various characteristics of a legal case involving a repressed memory of child sexual assault. Loglinear analyses revealed that females were three to six times more likely to offer a guilty decision than males and that individuals who believed that repressed memories could be accurately recalled were 12 to 33 times more likely to offer a guilty decision than individuals who did not believe that repressed memories could be accurately recalled. Overall, the three experiments demonstrated the importance of a number of trial characteristics in determining the juror decision making in repressed memory cases.
1999	Comparison of male and female dominated juries in a case of coerced sex with a male plaintiff	Heather Hyme, Linda Foley PhD, Melissa Pigott PhD	psychology journal	8183	no abstract at this time
1998	Repressed memories-effects of expert testimony on mock jurors' decision making	James Griffith MA, Terry Libkuman PhD Debra Poole PhD	psychology journal	6089	This experiment examined the influence of two types of expert testimony (specific and general) on mock jurors decision making and memory of a legal case involving a repressed memory of childhood sexual abuse. Participants were exposed to one of four conditions (specific plaintiff expert testimony specific defense expert testimony, specific plaintiff expert testimony general expert defense testimony, general plaintiff expert testimony specific defense expert testimony, or general plaintiff expert testimony general defense expert testimony), awarded damages to the plaintiff, and completed a free recall memory task. Gender differences were found for monetary damages with women awarding more than twice as much as men. Women also remembered more of the trial than did their male counterparts. Additionally, subjects who were exposed to specific expert testimonies were able to recall more than subjects in the general expert testimony condition. Possible re-signs for these results and the implications are discussed.
1998	Juror verdicts as a function of victim and defendant attractiveness in sexual assault cases	Marian Erian Cynthia Lin R Edward Geiselman PhD	psychology journal	8172	no abstract at this time
1997	Jury nullification-its impact on the legal system and forensic psychiatry	John Ravin MD	psychiatry journal	797	Jury nullification has become a highly divisive topic in American life. Recent verdicts in the O.J. Simpson, Marion Barry, Lemrick Nelson, and Rodney King cases have thrown doubt on whether the American jury system is viable. A review of the history of jury nullification, however, demonstrates that it is nether a recent phenomenon nor necessarily a destructive blow to the legal system. Rather it has been, at times, a healthy counterforce against tyranny and a positive purveyor of beneficial societal change. Forensic psychiatrists, to be effective in the courtroom, must be aware of the jury nullification process and demonstrate a sensitivity to the jury s possible hidden agenda while at the same time maintaining their ethical standards.
1997	Jury nullification and its impact on the legal system and on forensic psychiatry	John Ravin MD	psychiatry tapes	1274	Jury nullification occurs whenever a jury brings in a verdict which is believed to be in contradiction with the facts of the case and/or a verdict which ignores the judge's instructions. Recent trials such as that of O.J. Simpson, Marion Barry, Lemrich Nelson, and the assailants of Rodney King have thrown doubt on whether the American jury system is viable. A case review, however, demonstrates that jury nullification is neither a recent phenomenon nor necessarily a destructive blow to the legal system. Rather, it has been at times a healthy blow against tyranny and a massive force for beneficial societal change. Forensic psychiatrists must be aware of the jury nullification process or suffer neutralization of their testimony. Emphasis will he placed on identifying issues in a case likely to precipitate jury nullification. Steps to take to preserve the integrity of forensic psychiatric testimony will be discussed.
1997	Influence of forepersons and nonforepersons on mock jury decisions	Linda Foley PhD	psychology journal	657	The foreperson guides jury deliberations, thus most attorneys assume the foreperson is the most influential member of the jury. The present study examined whether forepersons were more influential than other members of mock juries in a civil trial.
1997	7 million dollar sexual harassment case - factors that affect jury determinations	Laraine Zapert PhD	psychology tape	10149	In many instances, jury awards in cases of sexual harassment have far exceeded expectations, yet sexual harassment is a complicated and difficult concept to prove. By examining the jury response in a recent multi-million-dollar lawsuit, this presentation focuses on issues involved in reaching a verdict of sexual harassment. It will specifically examine the essential role forensic psychologists can play in assisting attorneys in trial preparation in this area. Participants will learn how to identify and assess a variety of factors that affect jury determinations in sexual harassment cases.
1996	Jury selection procedures-theory and practice	Dennis R. Pollack, PhD	psychology tape	10006	no abstract at this time
1996	Judges' cautionary instructions on eyewitness testimony	R Edward Geiselman PhD Gabriella Ramirez Dennis Zemba	psychology journal	6085	There is little indication that judges' pattern instructions concerning eyewitness testimony sensitize jurors to relevant witnessing conditions. Two experiments were conducted to evaluate the pattern Telfaire instructions versus a revised set of instructions drafted from typical eyewitness expert testimony. In Experiment 1, Telfaire reduced subject-jurors' sensitivity to eyewitness evidence, producing skepticism or overbelief depending on the timing of their presentation during the trial. In Experiment 2, the revised instructions preserved juror sensitivity to the evidence and significantly affected jurors' knowledge of eyewitness factors. The jurors were able to recall more of the revised instructions and rated them as being more effective and understandable, as well as more likely to affect their verdicts. Implications for assuring juror awareness of eyewitness issues are discussed.
1996	How jurors process trial information	Calvin J. Langmade, Psy.D.	psychology tape	1305	no abstract
1994	Distortion and defamation: Justice Thomas judges psychiatry	Abraham Halpern MD	psychiatry journal	6092	In a 1992 case in which the United States Supreme Court decided that it is a violation of the Constitution for a state to allow the commitment to a mental institution of a non-mentally-ill insanity-acquittee until he is able to demonstrate that he is not dangerous to himself and others, Justice Clarence Thomas strongly argued for a diametrically opposite position. In doing so, he belittled and denigrated the field of psychiatry by taking out of context comments made in earlier Supreme Court opinions, and ignored the vast advances in psychiatric knowledge and practice over the past several decades. Given his anti-psychiatry and antediluvian views and his confrontational posture, American psychiatrists should not expect him to lessen his hostility to our profession.
1990	Expert testimony in the sentencing phases of trials -survey of judges, attorneys, psychiatrists and psychologists	Billie Corder EdD Valerie Spalding JD Dolly Whitsde JD Reid Whiteside PhD	psychology journal	5069	What do you consider to be the primary problems and errors you have observed in testimony given by mental health expert witnesses in the sentencing phases of trials? Do you feel judges or juries give more weight to testimony emphasizing research evidence, or to the clinical experience of the expert witnesses? What techniques have you observed to be most effective in the presentation of mental health expert witnesses testimony in this phase of trials? What techniques have you observed to be most effective in handling cross-examination by these witnesses? Authors report responses of judges and forensic psychiatrists and psychologists from their survey.
1985	Negligent infliction of emotional distress- plaintiff-bystander recovery	Justice William Federici, Chief Justice Supreme Court of New Mexico	psychiatry journal	5086	"In an opinion I recently authored, Ramirez v. Armstrong, 100 N.M. 538, 673 P.2d 122 (1983), New Mexico for the first time recognized a cause of action for the negligent infliction of emotional distress to bystanders. As forensic psychiatric improves and progresses, so too will case law in the courts, for the results reached in case law depend directly upon the credibility and reliability of expert testimony presented at the trial. We judges and the juries must rely upon your expertise. Your testimony will mold the future of emotional distress litigation. We place much faith in what you say and do. I have full confidence that you will honor that trust."