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

Learn More →

The Effects of Accomplice Witnesses and Jailhouse Informants on Jury Decision Making

The Effects of Accomplice Witnesses and Jailhouse Informants on Jury Decision Making The present study presents one of the first investigations of the effects of accomplice witnesses and jailhouse informants on jury decision-making. Across two experiments, participants read a trial transcript that included either a secondary confession from an accomplice witness, a jailhouse informant, a member of the community or a no confession control. In half of the experimental trial transcripts, the participants were made aware that the cooperating witness providing the secondary confession was given an incentive to testify. The results of both experiments revealed that information about the cooperating witness’ incentive (e.g., leniency or reward) did not affect participants’ verdict decisions. In Experiment 2, participant jurors appeared to commit the fundamental attribution error, as they attributed the motivation of the accomplice witness and jailhouse informant almost exclusively to personal factors as opposed to situational factors. Furthermore, both experiments revealed that mock jurors voted guilty significantly more often when there was a confession relative to a no confession control condition. The implications of the use of accomplice witness and jailhouse informant testimony are discussed. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Law and Human Behavior American Psychological Association

The Effects of Accomplice Witnesses and Jailhouse Informants on Jury Decision Making

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-psychological-association/the-effects-of-accomplice-witnesses-and-jailhouse-informants-on-jury-psEbJLuGwz

References (28)

Publisher
American Psychological Association
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 American Psychological Association
ISSN
0147-7307
eISSN
1573-661X
DOI
10.1007/s10979-007-9100-1
pmid
17703355
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The present study presents one of the first investigations of the effects of accomplice witnesses and jailhouse informants on jury decision-making. Across two experiments, participants read a trial transcript that included either a secondary confession from an accomplice witness, a jailhouse informant, a member of the community or a no confession control. In half of the experimental trial transcripts, the participants were made aware that the cooperating witness providing the secondary confession was given an incentive to testify. The results of both experiments revealed that information about the cooperating witness’ incentive (e.g., leniency or reward) did not affect participants’ verdict decisions. In Experiment 2, participant jurors appeared to commit the fundamental attribution error, as they attributed the motivation of the accomplice witness and jailhouse informant almost exclusively to personal factors as opposed to situational factors. Furthermore, both experiments revealed that mock jurors voted guilty significantly more often when there was a confession relative to a no confession control condition. The implications of the use of accomplice witness and jailhouse informant testimony are discussed.

Journal

Law and Human BehaviorAmerican Psychological Association

Published: Apr 17, 2008

There are no references for this article.