How well do jurors reason? Competence Dimensions of Individual Variation in a Juror Reasoning Task

Deanna Kuhn, Michael Weinstock, Robin Flaton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

80 Scopus citations

Abstract

Significant individual variation is observed in how people reason as jurors At the satisficing end of a continuum we identify, the juror draws on evidence selectively to construct a single story of what happened, with no acknowledgment of discrepant evidence or alternative possibilities A contrasting theory-evidence coordination mode of processing entails construction of multiple theories (story-verdict constellations) that are evaluated against the evidence and against alternatives Individual differences influence task outcome, the satisficing mode being associated with more extreme verdict choices and very high certainty.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)289-296
Number of pages8
JournalPsychological Science
Volume5
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jan 1994
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'How well do jurors reason? Competence Dimensions of Individual Variation in a Juror Reasoning Task'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this