Guilty or Not Guilty? A Look at the “Simulated” Jury Paradigm

David W. Wilson, Edward I Donnerstein

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Three experiments examined the effects of real versus hypothetical consequences on juridic decision‐making. Real consequences subjects believed their judgments would actually determine what happened to the defendant, while hypothetical consequences subjects believed the study simply dealt with jury decision‐making. In Experiment I, the defendant's character attractiveness had no influence on guilt judgments made by real consequences subjects but did so for hypothetical consequences subjects. In addition, character attractiveness affected recommendations of punishment for both real and hypothetical consequences subjects. In Experiment II, the defendant's physical attractiveness influenced neither real nor hypothetical consequences subjects on either the guilt or punishment measures. Experiment III showed that real consequences subjects recalled more situational evidence of the case than did hypothetical consequences subjects. In all three studies, more guilty verdicts occurred in the real consequences condition than in the hypothetical consequences condition. It was concluded that much current research on hypothetical juries may be misleading and that more attention should be given in the future to the variable of real versus hypothetical consequences. Possible mediating factors leading to real and hypothetical consequences differences were explored.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)175-190
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Applied Social Psychology
Volume7
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 1977
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Guilt
Punishment
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology

Cite this

Guilty or Not Guilty? A Look at the “Simulated” Jury Paradigm. / Wilson, David W.; Donnerstein, Edward I.

In: Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 7, No. 2, 1977, p. 175-190.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{39bef503202d4d5298e5b1af9c755a9c,
title = "Guilty or Not Guilty? A Look at the “Simulated” Jury Paradigm",
abstract = "Three experiments examined the effects of real versus hypothetical consequences on juridic decision‐making. Real consequences subjects believed their judgments would actually determine what happened to the defendant, while hypothetical consequences subjects believed the study simply dealt with jury decision‐making. In Experiment I, the defendant's character attractiveness had no influence on guilt judgments made by real consequences subjects but did so for hypothetical consequences subjects. In addition, character attractiveness affected recommendations of punishment for both real and hypothetical consequences subjects. In Experiment II, the defendant's physical attractiveness influenced neither real nor hypothetical consequences subjects on either the guilt or punishment measures. Experiment III showed that real consequences subjects recalled more situational evidence of the case than did hypothetical consequences subjects. In all three studies, more guilty verdicts occurred in the real consequences condition than in the hypothetical consequences condition. It was concluded that much current research on hypothetical juries may be misleading and that more attention should be given in the future to the variable of real versus hypothetical consequences. Possible mediating factors leading to real and hypothetical consequences differences were explored.",
author = "Wilson, {David W.} and Donnerstein, {Edward I}",
year = "1977",
doi = "10.1111/j.1559-1816.1977.tb01338.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "7",
pages = "175--190",
journal = "Journal of Applied Social Psychology",
issn = "0021-9029",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Guilty or Not Guilty? A Look at the “Simulated” Jury Paradigm

AU - Wilson, David W.

AU - Donnerstein, Edward I

PY - 1977

Y1 - 1977

N2 - Three experiments examined the effects of real versus hypothetical consequences on juridic decision‐making. Real consequences subjects believed their judgments would actually determine what happened to the defendant, while hypothetical consequences subjects believed the study simply dealt with jury decision‐making. In Experiment I, the defendant's character attractiveness had no influence on guilt judgments made by real consequences subjects but did so for hypothetical consequences subjects. In addition, character attractiveness affected recommendations of punishment for both real and hypothetical consequences subjects. In Experiment II, the defendant's physical attractiveness influenced neither real nor hypothetical consequences subjects on either the guilt or punishment measures. Experiment III showed that real consequences subjects recalled more situational evidence of the case than did hypothetical consequences subjects. In all three studies, more guilty verdicts occurred in the real consequences condition than in the hypothetical consequences condition. It was concluded that much current research on hypothetical juries may be misleading and that more attention should be given in the future to the variable of real versus hypothetical consequences. Possible mediating factors leading to real and hypothetical consequences differences were explored.

AB - Three experiments examined the effects of real versus hypothetical consequences on juridic decision‐making. Real consequences subjects believed their judgments would actually determine what happened to the defendant, while hypothetical consequences subjects believed the study simply dealt with jury decision‐making. In Experiment I, the defendant's character attractiveness had no influence on guilt judgments made by real consequences subjects but did so for hypothetical consequences subjects. In addition, character attractiveness affected recommendations of punishment for both real and hypothetical consequences subjects. In Experiment II, the defendant's physical attractiveness influenced neither real nor hypothetical consequences subjects on either the guilt or punishment measures. Experiment III showed that real consequences subjects recalled more situational evidence of the case than did hypothetical consequences subjects. In all three studies, more guilty verdicts occurred in the real consequences condition than in the hypothetical consequences condition. It was concluded that much current research on hypothetical juries may be misleading and that more attention should be given in the future to the variable of real versus hypothetical consequences. Possible mediating factors leading to real and hypothetical consequences differences were explored.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84986364796&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84986364796&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1977.tb01338.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1977.tb01338.x

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84986364796

VL - 7

SP - 175

EP - 190

JO - Journal of Applied Social Psychology

JF - Journal of Applied Social Psychology

SN - 0021-9029

IS - 2

ER -