Emotional Effects of Juries

The impact of emotions on juror judgments and decision-making.
Parent Book Series: Advances in psychology and law; Vol 2; ISSN: 2366-6099
Nunez, Narina.
Advances in psychology and law. Bornstein, Brian H., (Ed); Miller, Monica K., (Ed); pp. 55-93;
Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; Vol 2; 2016. xii, 346 pp.
Abstract:
A trial can be a highly emotionally charged event, yet jurors are often asked to put aside their emotions in rendering their decisions. The role of emotions in legal decision making has been debated extensively, with the traditionally held opinion by legal scholars that emotions largely impede rational decisions and sound judgment. In the first section of this chapter, we focus on the basic theories surrounding emotions and judgments, as well as the degree to which the general theories of emotions and decision making are relevant to decisions made in the courtroom. Some theories predict that emotions can alter jurors’ processing styles, and may indirectly affect decisions, yet others suggest that emotions are likely to affect decisions when a particular information processing style is active. Further, emotions have been theorized to impact the value we assign to particular information and what information we attend to or even recall. Finally, theories of emotion suggest that emotions may be informative, telling us how we feel about things, and therefore acting as direct information for judgments and decision making. Next, we examine factors during the course of the trial that may prompt specific emotional reactions from jurors. In the third section of the chapter, we discuss the psycholegal research that has examined the effect jurors’ emotions have on the decisions they make during trial. Last, we examine potential moderators that might alter the relation between emotions and decisions. In each section of the chapter, we highlight what we know and what we have learned, but we also highlight what we do not know and make suggestions for future research. Our treatment of this research area is not exhaustive, but we attempt to highlight important accomplishments in the field, and encourage additional research where gaps exist.

Jurors’ emotions and judgments of legal responsibility and blame: What does the experimental research tell us?
Feigenson, Neal.
Emotion Review, Vol 8(1), Jan, 2016. pp. 26-31.
Abstract:
Jurors’ emotions, both integral and incidental, can affect their attributions of legal responsibility and blame in several, sometimes complexly interrelated ways. The article reviews the experimental research, outlining the multiple paths of emotional influence, and explains why identifying them is worthwhile. It then discusses why the modest to moderate effect sizes found in the research may understate emotions’ actual influence in some cases yet overstate it in others, and discounts moral intuitionism as a reason for believing that emotional influences in real cases are stronger than the experimental data indicates. The article concludes with recommendations for further research.

Trials and tribulations: Psychopathic traits, emotion, and decision-making in an ambiguous case of sexual assault.
Peace, Kristine A. Psychology, Vol 5(10), Aug, 2014. pp. 1239-1253.
Abstract:
Judgments of criminal culpability often are influenced by factors unrelated to case content, such as the emotionality of the victim and the personality of the judge. In the current study, we investigated the relationship between psychopathic traits (high/low) and information processing modes (experiential vs. rational) in a group of mock jurors (N = 383) asked to judge a ‘he said, she said’ ambiguous case of sexual assault that varied according to both victim and defendant emotionality (high/low). The results demonstrated that victim and defendant emotionality was critical in determining case outcomes, which interacted with the processing style that participants utilized more. Specifically, experiential processors were more punitive towards the defendant when the defendant displayed low levels of emotion relative to high emotionality, whereas rational processors were slightly more punitive when high levels of emotion were being displayed. Psychopathic traits had no influence on ratings of veracity/credibility of the victim and defendant, or on overall guilt determinations and severity of sentencing. However, participants high in psychopathic traits believed that the alleged victim was making a false allegation more often when she was less emotional, and they were less punitive towards the false allegation than individuals low in psychopathic traits. These findings have important implications concerning how cases of sexual assault are interpreted in court, and extra-legal factors that may alter case outcomes.

Effects of mood and emotion on juror processing and judgments.
Semmler, Carolyn.
Behavioral Sciences & the Law, Vol 20(4), 2002. Special Issue: International perspectives on restorative and community justice. pp. 423-436.
Abstract:
This study explored the influence of mood and emotion on mock-jurors’ processing of testimonial inconsistencies, perceptions of witness credibility and offender culpability, and verdicts. 206 jurors (aged 18-70 yrs) participated. Subjects’ mood and testimonial consistency were manipulated using a simulated trial with a 2(mood: sad/neutral) x 2(testimonial consistency: consistent/inconsistent) between-groups design. It was found that sad mood resulted in more accurate reporting of testimonial inconsistencies, a finding consistent with previous research indicating more substantive processing in association with sad mood. Direct relationships between veridicality and number of inconsistencies detected and mock-juror judgments were also observed. Although anger was not experimentally manipulated, the data suggest that trial circumstances which arouse anger in jurors may impair processing and also bias their judgments of witnesses and defendants. Possible directions for research on mood and emotion in the courtroom context are suggested.