Hunt Jennifer S, Budesheim Thomas Lee
Department of Psychology, University of Nebraska--Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68588-0308, USA.
J Appl Psychol. 2004 Apr;89(2):347-61. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.2.347.
The Federal Rules of Evidence allow defendants to offer testimony about their good character, but that testimony can be impeached with cross-examination or a rebuttal witness. It is assumed that jurors use the defense's character evidence (CE) to form guilt and conviction judgments but use impeachment evidence only to assess the character witness's credibility. Two experiments tested these assumptions by presenting mock jurors with various forms of CE and impeachment. Participants made trait ratings for the character witness and defendant and guilt and conviction judgments. Positive CE did not affect guilt or conviction judgments, but cross-examination caused a backlash in which judgments were harsher than when no CE was given. Using path analysis, the authors tested a model of the process by which CE and impeachment affect defendant and witness impressions and guilt and conviction judgments. Implications for juror decision making are discussed.
《联邦证据规则》允许被告提供关于其良好品格的证言，但该证言可通过交叉询问或反驳证人予以质疑。据推测，陪审员利用辩方的品格证据（CE）来形成有罪和定罪判断，但仅利用质疑证据来评估品格证人的可信度。两项实验通过向模拟陪审员呈现各种形式的CE和质疑来检验这些假设。参与者对品格证人和被告进行特质评分，并做出有罪和定罪判断。正面的CE并未影响有罪或定罪判断，但交叉询问引发了一种反作用，即判断比未提供CE时更为严厉。作者使用路径分析测试了一个模型，该模型描述了CE和质疑影响对被告和证人的印象以及有罪和定罪判断的过程。文中讨论了对陪审员决策的影响。
