Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Jurors’ Use of Probabilistic Evidence

Jurors’ Use of Probabilistic Evidence Mock jurors’ use of probabilistic evidence was examined in a fractional factorial design manipulating 7 variables: strength of nonstatistical evidence; quantification of nonstatistical evidence; strength of statistical evidence; combination of 2 pieces of statistical evidence; instruction in use of Bayes’ theorem; and presentation of fallacies (both prosecutor’s and defense attorney’s) concerning use of statistical evidence. One hundred eighty-nine subjects viewed 1 of 16 videotapes presenting a condensed mock trial Subjects completed dependent measures after each of 4 witnesses and at the end of trial. The strength of both nonstatistical and probabilistic evidence affected verdicts; the other manipulations did not. Overall, subjects slightly underused the probabilistic evidence, as compared to their individualized Bayesian norms, and subjects did not succumb to fallacies. However, subjects greatly varied in over- or underutilization, even after Bayesian instruction. Future research should examine use of weak nonstatistical evidence, and should test different probabilistic instructions. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Law and Human Behavior American Psychological Association

Jurors’ Use of Probabilistic Evidence

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-psychological-association/jurors-use-of-probabilistic-evidence-w09hXDeh3Q

References (30)

Publisher
American Psychological Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 American Psychological Association
ISSN
0147-7307
eISSN
1573-661X
DOI
10.1007/BF01499132
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Mock jurors’ use of probabilistic evidence was examined in a fractional factorial design manipulating 7 variables: strength of nonstatistical evidence; quantification of nonstatistical evidence; strength of statistical evidence; combination of 2 pieces of statistical evidence; instruction in use of Bayes’ theorem; and presentation of fallacies (both prosecutor’s and defense attorney’s) concerning use of statistical evidence. One hundred eighty-nine subjects viewed 1 of 16 videotapes presenting a condensed mock trial Subjects completed dependent measures after each of 4 witnesses and at the end of trial. The strength of both nonstatistical and probabilistic evidence affected verdicts; the other manipulations did not. Overall, subjects slightly underused the probabilistic evidence, as compared to their individualized Bayesian norms, and subjects did not succumb to fallacies. However, subjects greatly varied in over- or underutilization, even after Bayesian instruction. Future research should examine use of weak nonstatistical evidence, and should test different probabilistic instructions.

Journal

Law and Human BehaviorAmerican Psychological Association

Published: Feb 1, 1996

There are no references for this article.