SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • Abel, M. H., & Watters, H. (2005). Attributions of guilt and punishment as functions of physical attractiveness and smiling. Journal of Social Psychology. 145(6).
  • Beckham, C. M., Spray, B. J., & Pietz, C. A. (2007). Jurors' Locus of Control and Defendants' Attractiveness in Death Penalty Sentencing. Journal of Social Psychology, 147, 285298.
  • Berger, C. R. (2007). A Tale of Two Communication Modes: When Rational and Experiential Processing Systems Encounter Statistical and Anecdotal Depictions of Threat. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 26, 215233.
  • Bergeron, C. E., & McKelvie, S. J. (2004). Effects of Defendant Age on Severity of Punishment for Different Crimes. 144(1), 7590.
  • Berry, D. S., & Zebrowitz-McArthur, L. Z. (1988). What's in a face? Facial Maturity and the Attribution of Legal Responsibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 2333.
  • Brainerd, C. J., Reyna, V. F., Wright, R., & Mojardin, A. H. (2003). Recollection rejection: False-memory editing in children and adults. Psychological Review, 110, 762784.
  • Bray, R. M., & Noble, A. (1978). Authoritarianism and Decision of Mock Juries: Evidence of a Jury Bias and Group Polarization. Soc. Psychol. 36(12), 14241430.
  • Bureau of Justice Statistics of State Court Sentencing of Convicted Felons. (1996). Available online at: http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/scsc9606.pdf.
  • Burns, L. R., & D'Zurilla, T. J. (1999). Individual differences in perceived information-processing styles in stress and coping situations: Development and validation of the Perceived Modes of Processing Inventory. Cognitive Therapy and Research 23, 345371.
  • Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116131.
  • Catlin, G., & Epstein, S. (1992). Unforgettable experiences: The relation of life events to basic beliefs about self and world. Soc. Cogn. 10, 189209.
  • Carlson, K., & Russo, E. (2001). Biased Interpretation of Evidence by Mock Jurors. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 7, 91103.
  • Cialdini, R., Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitude and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 354407.
  • Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155159.
  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences 2nd Ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • De La Fuente Solana, E., Garcia, J., & Martin Tamayo, I. (1998). Some individual differences in perception of the evidence and the verdict choice. Psychology, Crime-and-Law. 1998 Dec; Vol 4(4), 361373.
  • Denes-Raj, V., & Epstein, S. (1994). Conflict between intuitive and rational processing: when people behave against their better judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 819829.
  • DeSantis, A., & Kayson, W. A. (1997). Defendants' characteristics of attractiveness, race, and sex and sentencing decisions. Psychological Reports, 81, 679683.
  • Donovan, S., & Epstein, S. (1997). The Difficulty of the Linda Conjunction Problem Can Be Attributed to Its Simultaneous Concrete Unnatural Representation, and Not to Conversational Implicature. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
  • Downs, C., & Lyons, P. (1991). Natural observations of the links between attractiveness and initial legal judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 541547.
  • Efran, M. G. (1974). The effect of physical appearance on the judgment of guilt, interpersonal attraction, and the severity of recommended punishment in a simulated jury task. Journal of Research in Personality, 8, 4554.
  • Epstein, S. (2003). Cognitive-experiential self-theory of personality. In MiltonT. & Lerner, M. J. (Eds.), Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology Volume 5: Personality and Social Psychology. (pp. 159184). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons.
  • Epstein, S. (1991). Cognitive-experiential self-theory: an integrative theory of personality. In R.Curtis (Ed.), The relational self: convergences in psychoanalysis and social psychology (pp. 111137). New York: Guilford.
  • Epstein, S., & Meier, P. (1989). Constructive thinking: A broad coping variable with specific components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 332350.
  • Epstein, S. (1983). The ego-strength scale. University of Massachusetts. Amherst.
  • Epstein, S. (2003). Cognitive-experiential self-theory, an integrative psychodynamic theory of personality. Bulletin of the Academy of Clinical Psychology.
  • Epstein, S., & Meier, P. (1989). Constructive thinking: A broad coping variable with specific components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 332350.
  • Epstein, S., Pacini, R., Denes-Raj, V., & Heier, H. (1996). Individual differences in intuitive-experiential and analytical-rational thinking styles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 390405.
  • Erian, M., Lin, C., Patel, N., Neal, A., & Geiselman, R. E. (1998). Juror verdicts as a function of victim and defendant attractiveness in sexual assault cases. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 16, 2540.
  • Genovese, J. (2005). Paranormal beliefs, schizotypy, and thinking styles among teachers and future teachers. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 93102.
  • Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative description of personality: The Big Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 12161229.
  • Guthrie, C., Rachlinski, J. J., & Wistrich, A. J. (2001). Inside the judicial mind. Cornell Law Review, 86, 777830.
  • Hoffmann, M. B. (2003). The Case for Jury Sentencing. Duke Law Journal 52, 9511010.
  • Horowitz, M. R., Tressler, J. H., & Read, G. C. (1998). We, the Jury: The IADC-backed National Jury Trial Innovations Project. Defense Counsel Journal, 65(3), ABI/INFORM Global pg. 331.
  • Iontcheva, J. (2003). Jury Sentencing as Democratic Practice. Virginia Law Review 89, 311383.
  • Johnson, S. D. (1985). Religion as a defense in a mock-jury trial. Journal of Social Psychology. 125(2), 213220.
  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review, 80, 237251.
  • Kalven, H. Jr., (1964). The dignity of the civil jury system. Virginia Law Review, 50, 10551075.
  • Kassin, S. M., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1988). The American Jury on Trial. Bristol, PA: Taylor and Francis publishing.
  • King, N. & Noble, R., (2005). Jury Sentencing in Non-Capital Cases: Comparing Severity and Variance with Judicial Sentences in Two States. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 2, 331367.
  • Krauss, D., Lieberman, J., & Olson, J. (2004). The effects of rational and experiential information processing of expert testimony in death penalty cases. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 6, 801822.
  • Kring, A. M., Smith, D. A., & Neale, J. M. (1994). Individual differences in dispositional expressiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 934949.
  • Kuhn, D., Weinstock, M., & Flaton, R. (1994). How well do Jurors Reason? Complete Dimensions of Individual Variation in a Juror Reasoning Task. Psychological Science, 5(5), 289296.
    Direct Link:
  • Kulka, R. A., & Kessler, J. B. (1978). Is Justice Really Blind? –The Influence of Litigant Physical Attractiveness on Juridical Judgment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 8(4), 366381.
  • Lanni, A. (1999). Jury Sentencing in Noncapital Cases: An Idea Whose Time Has Come (Again?). The Yale Law Journal, 108, 17751803.
  • Lerner, M. J. (1980). The Belief in a Just World: A Fundamental Delusion. New York: Plenum Press.
  • Lieberman, J. D. (2002). Head over the Heart or Heart over the Head CEST and extralegal heuristics in juror decision making. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 32(12), 25262553.
  • Lieberman, J., D Krauss, D., Kyger, M., & Lehoux, M. (2007). Determining dangerousness in Sexually Violent Predator evaluations: Cognitive-experiential self-theory and juror judgments of expert testimony. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 25, 507526.
  • Loeffler, L. R., & Lawson, J.T. (2002). Age and Occupational Status of Defendant in Relation to Mock Juror Sentencing Recommendations. Current Psychology, 21(3).
  • Marks, A., Hine, D. W., Blore, R. L., & Phillips, W. (2008). Assessing individual differences in adolescents' preference for rational and experiential cognition. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 4252.
  • Mazzella, R., & Feingold, A. (1994). The Effects of Physical Attractiveness, Race, Socioeconomic-Status, and Gender of Defendants and Victims on Judgments of Mock Jurors a MetaAnalysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 13151344.
  • McCoy, M. L., & Gray, J. M. (2007). The impact of defendant gender and relationship to victim on juror decisions in a child sexual abuse case. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 15781593.
  • McGuire, M. V., & Bermant, G. (1977). Individual and group decisions in response to a mock trial: A methodological note. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 7, 220226.
  • Monahan, J., & Loftus, E. F. (1982). The Pyschology of Law. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 441475.
  • Mueller-Johnson, K., Toglia, M., Sweeney, C., & Ceci, S. J. (2007). The perceived credibility of older adults as witnesses and its relation to ageism. Behavioral Science and the Law, 25, 355375.
  • Pacini, R., & Epstein, S. (1999). The relation of rational and experiencial information processing styles to personality, basic beliefs, and the ratio-bias phenomenon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 972987.
  • Perez, D. A., Hosch, H. M., Ponder, B., & Trejo, G. C. (1993). Ethnicity of defendants and jurors as influences on jury decisions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 12491262.
  • Pretz, J. E., & Totz, K. S., (2007). Measuring individual differences in affective, heuristic, and holistic intuition. Personality and Individual Differences, 435, 12471257.
  • Robbennolt, J. K. (2002). Punitive damage decision making: The decisions of citizens and trial court judges. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 315342.
  • Sargent, M. J., & Bradfield, A. L. (2004). Race and information processing in criminal trials: Does the defendant's race affect how the facts are evaluated? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(8), 9951008.
  • Shiloh, S., Salton, E., & Sharabi, D. (2002). Individual differences in rational and intuitive thinking styles as predictors of heuristic responses and framing effects. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 415429.
  • Sigall, H., & Ostrove, N. (1975). Beautiful but dangerous: Effects of offender attractiveness and nature of the crime on juridic judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 410414.
  • Sommers, S. R., & Ellsworth, P. C. (2001). White juror bias: An investigation of prejudice against Black defendants in the American courtroom. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 201229.
  • Stewart, J. E. (1980). Defendant's attractiveness as a factor in the outcome of criminal trials: An observational study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 10(4).
  • Stewart, J. E. (1985). Appearance and Punishment: The Attraction-Leniency effect in the courtroom. Journal of Social Psychology, 125, 373378.
  • Warling, D., & Badali-Peterson, M. (2003). The Verdict on Jury Trials for Juveniles: the Effects of Defendant's Age on Trial Outcomes. Behavioral Sciences & the Law. 21(1), 6382.
  • Wissler, R. L., Hart, A. J., & Saks, M. J. (1999). Decision-making about general damages: A comparison of jurors, judges, and lawyers. Michigan Law Review, 98, 751826.
  • Wuesch, K. L., Castellow, W. A., & Moore, C. H. (1991). Effects of defendant attractiveness and type of crime on juridic judgment. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 713724.
  • Verosky, S. C., & Todorov, A. (2010). Generalization of Affective Learning About Faces to Perceptually Similar Faces. Psychological Science, 21, 619622.
  • Zebrowistz, A. L., & McDonald, M. S. (1991). The Impact of Litigants' Baby-Facedness and Attractiveness on Adjudications in Small Claims Court. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 603623.