Any evidence that may prejudce the trial and influence the verdict. E.g. previous convictions, hearsay, illegailly obtained.
1 of 8
Aim?
To look at whether the judge's instructions to ignore evidence has any evidence on the verdict + if witness credibility inlfuences ability of jury to follow instructions.
2 of 8
Method?
Lab experiment/Mock trial.
3 of 8
Sample
200 uni students - independent design.
4 of 8
Procedure (1)
Participant's listened to an audiotape of a fictional theft trial and then complete a questionnair which asked them to make decisions about the case. Inadmissiable evidence then introduced 'accidentally'.
5 of 8
Procedure (2)
Judge then either: 1) Tells them to ignore it. 2) Tells them with a legal explanation. 3) Rules it admissible. 4) Control group.
6 of 8
Results (1)
Jurors with no exp, ignored the evidence and found def. guily. Those who heard the exp overcompensated and where more likely to find the def. not guilty. Credibility no effect.
7 of 8
Conclusion?
Drawing attention to inadmissible evidence makes it more salient and harder to ignore. As they are 'aware' they may try and overcompensate to show that they are not biased.
8 of 8
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
Aim?
Back
To look at whether the judge's instructions to ignore evidence has any evidence on the verdict + if witness credibility inlfuences ability of jury to follow instructions.
Comments
No comments have yet been made