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.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
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.