• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Building Biased Jurors: Exposing the Circularity of the Inherent Bias Rationale for Felon-Juror Exclusion.塑造有偏见的陪审员:揭示排除重罪陪审员固有偏见理由的循环性。
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2019 Dec 19;27(1):110-125. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2019.1687047. eCollection 2020.
2
Cognitive and human factors in legal layperson decision making: Sources of bias in juror decision making.法律外行决策中的认知和人为因素:陪审员决策中的偏见来源。
Med Sci Law. 2022 Jul;62(3):206-215. doi: 10.1177/00258024221080655. Epub 2022 Feb 17.
3
Racial bias in jury selection hurts mock jurors, not just defendants: Testing one potential intervention.陪审团选择中的种族偏见不仅伤害被告,也伤害模拟陪审员:测试一种潜在的干预措施。
Law Hum Behav. 2023 Feb;47(1):153-168. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000494.
4
Structural bias in the sentencing of felony defendants.重罪被告量刑中的结构性偏见。
Soc Sci Res. 2013 Sep;42(5):1207-21. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2013.04.003. Epub 2013 Apr 28.
5
From the shadows into the light: How pretrial publicity and deliberation affect mock jurors' decisions, impressions, and memory.从阴影走向光明:审前宣传和审议如何影响模拟陪审员的决策、印象和记忆。
Law Hum Behav. 2015 Jun;39(3):294-310. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000117. Epub 2014 Dec 15.
6
Understanding pretrial publicity: predecisional distortion of evidence by mock jurors.理解审前宣传:模拟陪审员对证据的判决前歪曲
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2004 Jun;10(2):111-9. doi: 10.1037/1076-898X.10.2.111.
7
N.C. Supreme Court upholds exclusion of HIV in jury selection.北卡罗来纳州最高法院维持在陪审团遴选过程中排除感染艾滋病毒者的决定。
AIDS Policy Law. 1995 Sep 8;10(16):3-4.
8
The impact of misinformation presented during jury deliberation on juror memory and decision-making.陪审团审议期间出现的错误信息对陪审员记忆和决策的影响。
Front Psychol. 2024 Jan 26;15:1232228. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1232228. eCollection 2024.
9
Bias in Jurors vs Bias in Juries: New Evidence from the SDS Perspective.
Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1999 Oct;80(1):70-86. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1999.2855.
10
Keep your bias to yourself: How deliberating with differently biased others affects mock-jurors' guilt decisions, perceptions of the defendant, memories, and evidence interpretation.保持偏见:与具有不同偏见的他人协商如何影响模拟陪审员的有罪判决、对被告的看法、记忆和证据解释。
Law Hum Behav. 2017 Oct;41(5):478-493. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000256. Epub 2017 Jul 17.

本文引用的文献

1
The Growth, Scope, and Spatial Distribution of People With Felony Records in the United States, 1948-2010.《1948-2010 年美国有重罪记录人群的增长、范围和空间分布》
Demography. 2017 Oct;54(5):1795-1818. doi: 10.1007/s13524-017-0611-1.
2
Anticipatory injustice among adolescents: age and racial/ethnic differences in perceived unfairness of the justice system.青少年中的预期性不公正:司法系统感知不公平方面的年龄和种族/族裔差异。
Behav Sci Law. 2008;26(2):207-26. doi: 10.1002/bsl.805.
3
How type of excuse defense, mock juror age, and defendant age affect mock jurors' decisions.借口辩护类型、模拟陪审员年龄和被告年龄如何影响模拟陪审员的决策。
J Soc Psychol. 2007 Aug;147(4):371-92. doi: 10.3200/SOCP.147.4.371-392.
4
Crime victims serving as jurors: is there bias present?犯罪受害者担任陪审员:是否存在偏见?
Law Hum Behav. 2004 Dec;28(6):649-59. doi: 10.1007/s10979-004-0792-1.
5
The verdict on jury trials for juveniles: the effects of defendant's age on trial outcomes.对青少年陪审团审判的裁决:被告年龄对审判结果的影响。
Behav Sci Law. 2003;21(1):63-82. doi: 10.1002/bsl.517.

塑造有偏见的陪审员:揭示排除重罪陪审员固有偏见理由的循环性。

Building Biased Jurors: Exposing the Circularity of the Inherent Bias Rationale for Felon-Juror Exclusion.

作者信息

Binnall James M, Petersen Nick

机构信息

Department of Criminology, Criminal Justice, and Emergency Management, California State University, Long Beach, CA, USA.

Department of Sociology, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL, USA.

出版信息

Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2019 Dec 19;27(1):110-125. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2019.1687047. eCollection 2020.

DOI:10.1080/13218719.2019.1687047
PMID:32284783
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7144207/
Abstract

Justifying the statutory exclusion of convicted felons from jury service, lawmakers and courts allege that convicted felons harbor an inherent bias, making them sympathetic to the plight of criminal defendants and skeptical of the prosecution. Prior research suggests that a felony conviction is a significant predictor of such pre-trial biases. The purpose of this research is to further explore that finding, examining the potential impact of lifetime incarceration and multiple felony convictions on pre-trial biases. To do so, we measured the pre-trial biases of 240 otherwise eligible jurors with a felony criminal history. Results reveal that while the presence of multiple felony convictions is a statistically significant predictor of a pro-defense/anti-prosecution pre-trial bias, length of incarceration is not, suggesting that criminal justice system contact (procedure), not punishment (outcome), contributes to the formation of a pro-defense/anti-prosecution pre-trial bias among convicted felons. Results support prior research demonstrating that criminal justice procedures are stronger predictors of convicted felons' views than are punishment outcomes. These findings also expose the circularity of the inherent bias rationale, a justification for excluding convicted felons from a process that spawns the pre-trial biases allegedly warranting exclusion. In this way, the criminal justice system helps to build biased jurors.

摘要

为了证明将已定罪重罪犯排除在陪审团服务之外的法律规定是合理的,立法者和法院声称,已定罪重罪犯存在内在偏见,这使他们同情刑事被告的困境并对检方持怀疑态度。先前的研究表明,重罪定罪是此类审前偏见的一个重要预测指标。本研究的目的是进一步探究这一发现,考察终身监禁和多次重罪定罪对审前偏见的潜在影响。为此,我们对240名有重罪犯罪史但其他方面符合条件的陪审员的审前偏见进行了测量。结果显示,虽然多次重罪定罪在统计学上是支持辩方/反对检方审前偏见的一个显著预测指标,但监禁时长并非如此,这表明刑事司法系统的接触(程序)而非惩罚(结果)促成了已定罪重罪犯中支持辩方/反对检方审前偏见的形成。结果支持了先前的研究,即刑事司法程序比重刑结果更能预测已定罪重罪犯的观点。这些发现还揭示了内在偏见理论的循环性,这一理论是将已定罪重罪犯排除在一个会产生据称需要排除的审前偏见的程序之外这一做法的正当理由。通过这种方式,刑事司法系统助长了有偏见的陪审员的形成。