Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
G. Davies, S. Lloyd-Bostock, Mary McMurran, Clare Wilson (1996)
Psychology, law, and criminal justice: International developments in research and practice.
C. Haney, D. Logan (1994)
Broken Promise: The Supreme Court's Response to Social Science Research on Capital PunishmentJournal of Social Issues, 50
S. Fiske, Shelley Taylor (1991)
Social cognition, 2nd ed.
S. Fuller, W. Shadish (1995)
The Social Psychology of ScienceContemporary Sociology, 24
C. Haney (1980)
Psychology and legal change: On the limits of a factual jurisprudenceLaw and Human Behavior, 4
M. Saks (1989)
Legal Policy Analysis and EvaluationAmerican Psychologist, 44
G. Davies, S. Lloyd-Bostock, Mary McMurran, Clare Wilson (1996)
Psychology, Law, and Criminal Justice
Douglas Perkins (1988)
The use of social science in public interest litigation: A role for community psychologistsAmerican Journal of Community Psychology, 16
(1980)
The use/nonuse/misuse of applied social science in the courts
C. Haney (1980)
Psychology and legal changeLaw and Human Behavior, 4
April Wursten, B. Sales (1988)
Community psychologists in state legislative decision makingAmerican Journal of Community Psychology, 16
R. Redding (1998)
How Common-Sense Psychology Can Inform Law and Psycholegal Research, 5
H. Weiner, R. Nisbett, L. Ross (1981)
Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 76
P. Wortman, F. Bryant (1985)
School Desegregation and Black AchievementSociological Methods & Research, 13
D. Kahneman, A. Tversky (2000)
Choices, Values, and Frames
T. Wilson, B. DePaulo, D. Mook, Kristen Klaaren (1993)
Scientists' Evaluations of Research: the Biasing Effects of the Importance of the TopicPsychological Science, 4
C. Lord, L. Ross, M. Lepper (1979)
Biased Assimilation and Attitude Polarization: The Effects of Prior Theories on Subsequently Considered EvidenceJournal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37
G. Goodman, M. Levine, G. Melton, D. Ogden (1991)
Child witnesses and the confrontation clauseLaw and Human Behavior, 15
P. Ellsworth, L. Ross (1983)
Public Opinion and Capital Punishment: A Close Examination of the Views of Abolitionists and RetentionistsCrime & Delinquency, 29
G. Miller, N. Cantor (1982)
Book Review Nisbett, R. , & Ross, L.Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment.Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1980.Social Cognition, 1
R. Baron, D. Kenny (1986)
The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.Journal of personality and social psychology, 51 6
P. Conover, S. Feldman (1981)
The Origins and Meaning of Liberal/Conservative Self-Identifications.American Journal of Political Science, 25
J. Sidanius, F. Pratto, Lawrence Bobo (1996)
INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS AND GROUP PROCESSES Racism, Conservatism, Affirmative Action, and Intellectual Sophistication: A Matter of Principled Conservatism or Group Dominance?
W. Bailey, R. Peterson (1994)
Murder, Capital Punishment, and Deterrence: A Review of the Evidence and an Examination of Police KillingsJournal of Social Issues, 50
D. Bersoff, D. Glass (1995)
The Not-So Weisman: The Supreme Court's Continuing Misuse of Social Science Research, 2
Gerald Sharboro (1975)
Improving the Legal ProcessThe ANNALS of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 421
Paul Biderman (1996)
Of Vulcans and Values: Judicial Decision-Making and Implications for Judicial EducationJuvenile and Family Court Journal, 47
B. Tabachnick, L. Fidell (1983)
Using Multivariate Statistics
C. Tremper (1987)
Sanguinity and disillusionment where law meets social scienceLaw and Human Behavior, 11
L. Walker, J. Monahan (1987)
Social Frameworks: A New Use of Social Science in LawVirginia Law Review, 73
G. VandenBos, P. Deleon, M. Pallak (1982)
An alternative to traditional medical care for the terminally ill. Humanitarian, policy, and political issues in hospice care.The American psychologist, 37 11
M. J. Mahoney (1977)
Publication prejudices: An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review systemCognitive Therapy and Research, 1
N. Reppucci (1984)
Children, mental health, and the law
J. P. Lipton (1988)
A new look at the use of social science evidence in trademark litigationTrademark Reporter, 78
G. Shafer, Daniel Kahnerman, P. Slovic, A. Tversky (1984)
Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79
S. T. Fiske, S. E. Taylor (1991)
Social cognition
A. Hastorf, H. Cantril (2011)
They saw a game: a case study.Journal of abnormal psychology, 49 1
G. Melton (1987)
The Clashing of Symbols: Prelude to Child and Family Policy.American Psychologist, 42
Jennifer Woolard, N. Reppucci, Richard Redding (1996)
Theoretical and methodological issues in studying children's capacities in legal contextsLaw and Human Behavior, 20
M. Mahoney (1979)
Scientist as Subject: The Psychological Imperative
Blair Johnson, A. Eagly (1989)
Effects of involvement on persuasion: a meta-analysisPsychological Bulletin, 106
E. Mertz, G. Melton (1987)
Reforming the Law: Impact of Child Development Research
C. Patterson, R. Redding (1996)
Lesbian and Gay Families with Children: Implications of Social Science Research for PolicyJournal of Social Issues, 52
D. Frey (1986)
Recent Research on Selective Exposure to Information
J. Monahan, L. Walker (1998)
Social science in law: Cases and materials
J. Tanford (1990)
The Limits of a Scientific Jurisprudence: The Supreme Court and PsychologyIndiana Law Journal, 66
J. Monahan (1984)
The prediction of violent behavior: toward a second generation of theory and policy.The American journal of psychiatry, 141 1
D. Frey (1986)
Advances in experimental social psychology
J. Monahan, L. Walker (1986)
Social Authority: Obtaining, Evaluating, and Establishing Social Science in LawUniversity of Pennsylvania Law Review, 134
L. Walker, J. Monahan (1996)
Daubert and the Reference Manual: An Essay on the Future of Science in LawVirginia Law Review, 82
D. Dillman (1979)
Mail and telephone surveys : the total design methodSocial Forces, 11
N. Vidmar, R. Schuller (1989)
Juries and Expert Evidence: Social Framework TestimonyLaw and contemporary problems, 52
F. Bacon (1960)
The New Organon, and Related Writings
L. Festinger (1957)
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
J. Sidanius, F. Pratto, L. Bobo (1996)
Racism, conservatism, affirmative action, and intellectual sophistication: A matter of principled conservatism or group dominance?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70
D. Bersoff (1993)
Judicial Deference to Nonlegal Decisionmakers: Imposing Simplistic Solutions on Problems of Cognitive Complexity in Mental Disability Law, 46
S. Diamond, Jonathan Casper (1994)
Empirical Evidence and the Death Penalty: Past and FutureJournal of Social Issues, 50
B. L. Cutler, S. D. Penrod (1995)
Mistaken identifications: The eyewitness, psychology, and the law
P. Deleon, A. O'Keefe, G. VandenBos, A. Kraut (1982)
How to influence public policy: A blueprint for activism.American Psychologist, 37
Scott Sundby (1997)
The Jury As Critic: An Empirical Look at How Capital Juries Perceive Expert and Lay TestimonyVirginia Law Review, 83
P. Rosen (1972)
The Supreme Court and social scienceStanford Law Review, 25
K. Ericsson, Jacqui Smith (1991)
Toward a general theory of expertise : prospects and limits
P. Ellsworth, Samuel Gross (1994)
Hardening of the Attitudes: Americans' Views on the Death PenaltyJournal of Social Issues, 50
G. S. Goodman, M. Levine, G. B. Melton, D. W. Ogden (1991)
Child witnesses and the Confrontation Clause: The American Psychological Association BriefMaryland v. Craig. Law and Human Behavior, 15
G. Melton, N. Russo (1987)
Adolescent abortion. Psychological perspectives on public policy.The American psychologist, 42 1
D. Bersoff (1992)
Autonomy for vulnerable populations: the Supreme Court's reckless disregard for self-determination and social science.Villanova law review, 37 6
H. Bernstein, D. Horowitz, David Lange, H. Powell, Melvin Shimm, J. Weistart, R. Danner, Claire Germain, B. Baccari, Lisa Eichhorn, James Farrin, K. Cashion, Steven Chabinsky, Thomas Contois, James Glenister, Stephen Armitage, J. Cannon, C. Connolly, David Dabbs, Katherine Flanagan, P. Franklin, Donald Nielsen, Christopher Hart, Charles North, William O'Neil, Jane Schaefer, Eric Lieberman, Janet Moore, A. Walsh, Raymond Wierciszewski (1990)
LAW AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS
M. Levine, B. Howe (1985)
The Penetration of Social Science into Legal CultureLaw & Policy, 7
One theory to explain why courts often ignore relevant social science research is that it often refutes judges’ sociopolitical beliefs. Using the death penalty as the exemplar social issue, this study explored whether lawyers’ sociopolitical attitudes affect their judgments about the legal relevance of social science research introduced in court cases. Law students and state court judges completed a questionnaire that presented vignette summaries of two U.S. Supreme Court death penalty cases along with descriptions of the social science evidence contained in the Court opinions, with the evidence manipulated in this study to either support or not support the death penalty. After reading each vignette, participants rated the legal relevance, admissibility, and dispositive weight of the social science evidence. They then were asked about their own attitudes about the death penalty, science and social science backgound, attitude about social science, and political attitudes. In the case where the social science evidence was used to make new law generally, there was a bias effect: participants rated the evidence higher when it matched their own beliefs as compared to when it did not match their beliefs. Participants’ level of science background neither moderated nor mediated the bias effects. There was no relationship between political views and evidentiary ratings or attitude about the use of social science in law. However, there was a relationship between evidentiary ratings and attitudes about the use of social science in law, as well as between evidentiary ratings and attitudes about judicial interpretation. Implications of the results for the use of social science in law are discussed.
Law and Human Behavior – American Psychological Association
Published: Feb 1, 1999
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.