Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to submit your manuscript to SPPS

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
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
Right arrow Citation Map
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
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sommers, S. R.
Right arrow Articles by Kassin, S. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Sommers, S. R.
Right arrow Articles by Kassin, S. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

On the Many Impacts of Inadmissible Testimony: Selective Compliance, Need for Cognition, and the Overcorrection Bias

Samuel R. Sommers

University of Michigan, ssommers{at}umich.edu

Saul M. Kassin

Williams College, skassin{at}williams.edu

A mock juror study tested three hypotheses: (a) Jurors comply selectively with instructions to disregard inadmissible testimony, (b) this effect is greater among jurors who are high rather than low in the need for cognition (NC), and (c) high-NC decision makers sometimes overcorrect against the perceived biasing agent of inadmissible testimony. Participants read a trial summary in which the admissibility of an incriminating wiretap and the basis for this ruling were manipulated. Consistent with the prediction that jurors would be motivated to reach a "just" verdict, participants disregarded an inadmissible wiretap when it was deemed unreliable but not when it violated due process. This pattern of selective compliance was found only among high-NC jurors. High-NC participants also exhibited signs of bias overcorrection, estimating the probability of the defendant’s guilt to be lower in the inadmissible-unreliable condition than in the no-wiretap control. The theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed.

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 27, No. 10, 1368-1377 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/01461672012710012
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?