Psychology, Claremont McKenna College, 850 Columbia Avenue, Claremont, CA 91711, USA.
Behav Sci Law. 2010 Nov-Dec;28(6):730-50. doi: 10.1002/bsl.902. Epub 2009 Oct 26.
Despite concerns about generalizability, past mock trial research has concluded that effects of sample (i.e., students versus representative mock jurors) are negligible. The current study was conducted to explore this conclusion within the conceptual framework of cognitive-experiential self-theory (CEST). Through a mock civil commitment hearing of a sexually violent predator, responses of student (n = 138) and representative (n = 240) mock jurors were compared. Results revealed several important differences between samples: (a) the student sample scored higher on the rational processing measure (i.e., need for cognition); (b) students' verdicts were also significantly correlated to a measure of their cognitive processing style, an enduring personal characteristic related to the extent to which an individual engages in either effortful/effortless cognition; and (c) the representative sample was more punitive, was more persuaded by clinical expert testimony, and evidenced a greater gender effect in its decisions. Implications for jury decision-making research are discussed.
尽管人们对推广性存在担忧，但过去的模拟审判研究得出结论，样本（即学生与代表性模拟陪审员）的影响可以忽略不计。本研究旨在在认知体验自我理论（CEST）的概念框架内探讨这一结论。通过对性暴力掠夺者的民事拘留听证进行模拟，比较了学生（n=138）和代表性（n=240）模拟陪审员的反应。结果揭示了两个样本之间的几个重要差异：（a）学生样本在理性处理措施（即认知需求）上得分更高；（b）学生的判决也与他们的认知处理风格的衡量标准显著相关，这是一种与个体进行努力/不费力认知的程度相关的持久个人特征；（c）代表性样本更具惩罚性，更容易被临床专家证言所说服，并且在其决策中表现出更大的性别效应。讨论了对陪审团决策研究的影响。
