Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bourgeois, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Forster Lee, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Bourgeois, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Forster Lee, L.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 19, No. 2, 220-227 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167293192012
© 1993 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

Effects of Technicality and Access to Trial Transcripts on Verdicts and Information Processing in a Civil Trial

Martin J. Bourgeois

University of Toledo

Irwin A. Horowitz

University of Toledo

Lynne Forster Lee

Northern Territories University, Darwin, Australia

Two studies assessed the effects of evidence technicality on judgments and evidence processing in a civil trial. In Study 1, 48 jury-eligible adults heard a medical malpractice case that was either high or low in technicality of evidence and were or were not given access to a verbatim trial transcript while reaching a verdict. The evidence of the trial favored the defendant. However, jurors unable to process systematically were expected to employ a readily available counterfactual heuristic and to decide for the plaintiff. In Study 2, 64 college students heard the same trial either high or low in technicality and with or without closing arguments that blocked the use of the counterfactual heuristic. In both studies, low evidence technicality led jurors to process the evidence systematically and to decide for the defendant. Access to transcripts and blocking of counterfactual reasoning led to increases in decisions for the defendant under high evidence complexity.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?