Curley Lee J, Murray Jennifer, MacLean Rory, Munro James, Lages Martin, Frumkin Lara A, Laybourn Phyllis, Brown David
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, School of Psychology and Counselling, The Open University, Milton Keynes, England, UK.
The School of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Psychiatr Psychol Law. 2021 May 4;29(3):323-344. doi: 10.1080/13218719.2021.1904450. eCollection 2022.
The Scottish verdict of represents a second acquittal verdict which is not legally defined. Existing research into the influence of the verdict on jury decision making is modest. The main aim of the current study was therefore to investigate the influence of verdict systems (two vs three) on juror decision making. The effect of pre-trial bias and evidence anchors on juror judgements were also examined. One-hundred and twenty-eight mock jurors listened to two homicide vignettes and were asked to rate their belief of guilt of the accused and to give a verdict in both trials. The results suggest that pre-trial bias was a significant predictor of both verdict choice and belief of guilt, whereas evidence anchors were not a significant predictor of either. Finally, both and verdicts were given with increased frequency in the two-verdict system when compared to the three-verdict system.
苏格兰的“ ”裁决代表了第二种无罪裁决,这种裁决在法律上没有明确界定。目前关于“ ”裁决对陪审团决策影响的研究较少。因此,本研究的主要目的是调查裁决系统(两种裁决与三种裁决)对陪审员决策的影响。同时还考察了审前偏见和证据锚定对陪审员判断的影响。128名模拟陪审员听取了两个杀人案件的 vignettes,并被要求在两次审判中对被告有罪的信念进行评分并做出裁决。结果表明,审前偏见是裁决选择和有罪信念的重要预测因素,而证据锚定在两者中均不是重要预测因素。最后,与三种裁决系统相比,在两种裁决系统中,“ ”和“ ”裁决的给出频率更高。