Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

36 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
The power of the eyewitness
18% voted for conviction without a eyewitness

72% convicted with an eyewitness

68% voted for conviction with legally blind person.
Are eyewitness accounts truly scruitnized?
NO. Real eyewitness accounts and fake eyewitness accounts were shown and people believed the account 80% of the time in either case.
Evidence suggests that jurrors believe LESS in eyewitnesses who have POOR recall of detailed information. Ironically enough
these are the best eyewitnesses. The others make up details and dont remember important images like faces as well.
Aproximately 60% of those falsely accused are because "the eyes decieve". this is however confounded by what belief?
Witnesses are more confident than correct. Among those who chose a wrong assailant 74% were confident in their answers.
incorporating misinformation into ones memory of the event after recieving misleading information about it.
Misinformation effect
Stop or yield study.
Two pictures a car parked at a stop sign or at a yield sign. 2 different groups for each picture were told correct information or misleading information

stop pic:
group 1: someone took stop
grop 2: someone took yield.

when later asked those that were mislead believed they had seen the other pic.
Repetition of suggestive or leading questions...
increases the likelihood that details of the question will make their way into eyewitness testimony.
Who is easily influenced as an eyewitness?
The effect of retelling. the more we retell a story
the more we begin to believe any falsehoods in the story as facts.
Feedback to witnesses: Subjects were shown a grainy video of a man, who later killed a sheriff. And given the pictures of the men in the lineup (- the gunmen) what happened?
All students chose a wrong suspect and were told either good job, no it was actually #X, or not told anything.

those that were told good job rated themselves as 6-7 confident (on a scale of 7). finally of those 6's and 7's 58% deny that the feedback had any role in their confidence.
When researchers gave posiitve feedback "good you identified the gunmen correctly" what was the results in eyewitness confidence?
it soared. and in those with high confidence despite being wrong, 58% deny that the confirmation of being correct had any influence on their confidence.
Ways to reduce eyewitness flaws?
- train police not to interupt. let witness tell the whole story ~ gives 50% more details and does not increase the false memories.

-play with lineups. remind eyewitness that the suspect may or may not be in the lineup. Run lineups that the suspect is not even in.

-small lineups. in a large lineup the eyewitness is more likely to just choose the person who MOST looks like the culprit.

-educate jurrors that eyewitness accounts may not always be accurate.
Is is true that disliked jurrors cant be acquitted and those beloved cant be convicted?
No. usually evidence is clear enough that jurrors can set aside biases and focus on the facts.
Effects of Physical attractiveness.
Students obviously rated that physical attractiveness should have no effect on presumption of guilt. Later he proved that the more attractive suspect was voted to recieve less convictions and less jail time.
Ugly people are convicted more often and specifically rated as
more dangerous, especially sexual offenders.
What is the effect of a suspect who is similar to the jurrors.
We as jurrors are more likely to be understanding of a suspect that looks like ourselves, thinks like ourselves or of similar age, religion, race or gender (in sexual assault cases).
Can jurrors forget or not regard comments made in court that are inadmissable or struck down by judges?
Maybe not. It is very difficult for jurrors to for example not take a person's previous criminal record into account.
How was it experimentally determined that the judge's instructions hold little consideration?
Subjects were told of a case and presented with a weak prosecutions case and defenses case. No one convicted. then shown incriminationg telephone call (35% guilty). Judge threw out the evidence (35% guilty).
Why cant jurrors scrap the information deemed inadmisable?
Reactance- a motive to protect or restore onse's self of freedom.
Pretrial publicity also effects criminal proceedings by...
giving jurrrors a sense of who "the media" thinks the suspect is. F.E: O.J jurrors were not allowed to watch TV because they feared all the history of abuse may cause an unfair trial.
What does research suggest to the following questions?

- does a sever potential punishment make jurrors less likely to convict?
-are defendents judged more harshly when the victim is pretty or suffered alot?
-do experienced jurrors differ from novice jurrors?
Pretrial publicity also effects criminal proceedings by...
giving jurrrors a sense of who "the media" thinks the suspect is. F.E: O.J jurrors were not allowed to watch TV because they feared all the history of abuse may cause an unfair trial.
Problems with jurrors in court procedures
- lack of jurror comprehension of legal jargon
-premature conclusions based on simple non-incriminating evidence
-judges require that for a conviction of "whatever" it must meet his definition, studies show if it fits the jurrors individual defenitions they will convict.
Jury selections effects
Jury selection is important in certain cases (racial crimes, gender crimes, and personal injury suits)

-EVIDENCE is MORE important
those who feel strongly against the death penalty are more likely to ________; while those that argue for the death penalty are more likely to _______________.
acquit; convict
In what way is americas view of the death penalty changing?
America is moving away from the death penalty.
Is there any deterance from imposing a death penalty?
Studies show NO. When a state adds the death penalty violence does NOT decrease. when they remove the penalty crime does NOT increase and finally states with a death penalty do NOT have lower homicide rates (in fact they have higher rates).
do jurrors go into deliberation in agreement?
NO. 2/3 jurrors will not agree going into deliberations. 95% agree after. Obviously there is group polarization at play.
What magic # did researchers find necessary before trial to predict the verdict?
2/3. the group verdict was usually the alternative favored with at least this margin. otherwise hung jury would be likely.
Who has the most influence in deliberations?
High-status males and those who are self confident, persistant and vocal.
What are the effects of sentencing in deliberations (groups) after a verdict has been handed down?
GROUP POLARIZATION: those that were authoritarian believed in a large number of years and after deliberations agreed to a higher # of yrs. those that werent believed a low # of yrs and after an even lower # of yrs.
Even a small majority in favor of acquital will usually result in an acquital judgemnent. WHY?
Group leniency. In cases where the majority does not prevail it ussually shifts to acquittal. recall the burden of proof "beyond reasonable doubt" lies on those convicting.
Are 12 heads better than one?
in this case... YES! Research shows that it does not allow a person to hold too tightly to thier pre-existing beliefs since normative influence is at play.
Are six heads as good as 12?
In lower decisions only 6 jurrors are necessary and unanimity is not necessary. NOT FAIR b/c a minority still exists and a 10/2 split is NOT equal to a 5/1 split. A larger portion of the 10 are conforming than the 5 in the latter. 12 person juries thus have more hung juries than 6 membered juries.
what is the consensus of 6 to 12 membered juries?
12 membered juries are better they better represent the population, better recall testimony....
the idea of the legal system is based on...
the naive scientist