Guilty, not guilty, or...? Multiple options in jury verdict choices

16Citations
Citations of this article
25Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Three studies investigate the role and impact of alternative verdicts to the conventional choice between conviction and acquittal. The primary focus is on the Not Proven option, with a lesser charge alternative included for comparisons. The results contradict a commonly held view that the Not Proven option attracts jurors away from returning a conviction. Instead, Not Proven more often supplants outright acquittals. Judged probabilities of guilt from jurors returning Not Proven are mid-range, in contrast to the markedly higher probabilities given by those returning conviction of a lesser charge (manslaughter) and lower probabilities from those returning an acquittal. Jurors returning Not Proven report greater decisional difficulty and conflict than those returning any other verdict, including conviction on a lesser charge. No direct evidence is found that third options function as a decision-avoidant alternative to conviction or acquittal. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Smithson, M., Deady, S., & Gracik, L. (2007). Guilty, not guilty, or...? Multiple options in jury verdict choices. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 20(5), 481–498. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.572

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free