Matching Items (20)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: psychology
- Creators: Salerno, Jessica
Description
The purpose of this study was to examine mock jurors’ decision making in insanity cases. Specific instructions (vs. typical) juror instructions were tested to increase jurors’ comprehension of verdict options and reduce the effects of preexisting attitudes and reliance on cognitively biased thought processes in their legal decision making.
The specific instructions in this study were inspired by Fuzzy Trace Theory, which holds that simple language and visual aids that convey the ‘gist’ of complex information can help people make better decisions (Reyna & Brainerd, 1995). Participants (N= 496) were randomly assigned to one of two juror instruction conditions (specific vs. typical). All participants read a 10-page insanity defense case vignette, and were tasked with reaching a verdict. They were provided with 5 verdict options: Not Guilty, Guilty, and three different insanity options (Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity, Guilty but Mentally Ill, Guilty Except Insane). Results supported the hypothesis that jurors who received specific (vs. typical) instructions would comprehend more information about the available verdicts, and would be more likely to choose an insanity defense verdict. As expected, jurors’ preexisting attitudes toward the insanity defense influenced their verdicts. Although it was hypothesized that increasing jurors’ understanding would result in them relying less on their attitudes and motivated reasoning processes in reaching their legal judgments, the evidence did not support this. Results suggest more specific instructions that includes information about outcomes is preferred by jurors, and that they are better able to understand and perform their duties when provided with more useful information. However, further research is needed to identify methods for helping jurors rely less on biased reasoning processes in their legal judgments.
The specific instructions in this study were inspired by Fuzzy Trace Theory, which holds that simple language and visual aids that convey the ‘gist’ of complex information can help people make better decisions (Reyna & Brainerd, 1995). Participants (N= 496) were randomly assigned to one of two juror instruction conditions (specific vs. typical). All participants read a 10-page insanity defense case vignette, and were tasked with reaching a verdict. They were provided with 5 verdict options: Not Guilty, Guilty, and three different insanity options (Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity, Guilty but Mentally Ill, Guilty Except Insane). Results supported the hypothesis that jurors who received specific (vs. typical) instructions would comprehend more information about the available verdicts, and would be more likely to choose an insanity defense verdict. As expected, jurors’ preexisting attitudes toward the insanity defense influenced their verdicts. Although it was hypothesized that increasing jurors’ understanding would result in them relying less on their attitudes and motivated reasoning processes in reaching their legal judgments, the evidence did not support this. Results suggest more specific instructions that includes information about outcomes is preferred by jurors, and that they are better able to understand and perform their duties when provided with more useful information. However, further research is needed to identify methods for helping jurors rely less on biased reasoning processes in their legal judgments.
ContributorsHight, Morgan Leigh (Author) / Neal, Tess M (Thesis advisor) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Committee member) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
Mood disorders are highly prevalent, especially in adolescent populations. One potential cause of the widespread nature of these disorders is the formation of stigma around emotionality. Emotion research, while extensive, has not expanded to capture how a parent’s emotion regulation and expression may lead to stigmatized behaviors in their child affecting that child’s mental health into adulthood. The current thesis aimed to investigate the relevance of this novel concept – emotionality stigma – in the relationship between parental emotionality and adult-child mental health. Using social learning theory, parental emotionality was predicted to influence a child’s emotionality into adulthood. Specifically, this thesis investigated if parental emotion over- and under-expression (dysregulation) would influence adult-children to perceive a stigma around emotionality leading to worse mental health, whereas well-regulated parental emotion expression would relate to adult-child emotional intelligence, leading to better mental health. Moreover, it was predicted that these relationships would differ depending on parent and child gender. To examine these ideas, data was collected from 1,136 college and community individuals through a university survey system and Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Using a combination of linear regression, PROCESS, and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) models, the results supported the proposed hypotheses. As predicted, parental dysregulation in childhood predicted impaired adult-child mental health, whereas parental regulation in childhood predicted lower levels of adult-child depression and anxiety. Additionally, emotionality stigma and emotional intelligence partially mediated the relationship between parental emotionality and adult-child mental health. Furthermore, results showed interesting gender differences; male participants were more impacted by both maternal and paternal emotionality as compared to female participants. These findings not only build on emotion research, but also have numerous applications in practice including improving parenting classes and family therapy interventions. This study is the first to explore the role of parental emotionality on adult-child mental health through stigma and emotional intelligence.
ContributorsSeely, Hayley (Author) / Mickelson, Kristin D. (Thesis advisor) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Roberts, Nicole (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
There is conflicting evidence regarding whether a biasing effect of neuroscientific evidence exists. Early research warned of such bias, but more recent papers dispute such claims, with some suggesting a bias only occurs in situations of relative judgment, but not in situations of absolute judgment. The current studies examined the neuroimage bias within both criminal and civil court case contexts, specifically exploring if a bias is dependent on the context in which the neuroimage evidence is presented (i.e. a single expert vs. opposing experts). In the first experiment 408 participants read a criminal court case summary in which either one expert witness testified (absolute judgment) or two experts testified (relative judgment). The experts presented neurological evidence in the form of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data and the evidence type varied between a brain image and a graph. A neuroimage bias was found, in that jurors who were exposed to two experts were more punitive when the prosecution presented the image and less punitive when the defense did. In the second experiment 240 participants read a summary of a civil court case in which either a single expert witness testified or two experts testified. The experts presented fMRI data to support or refute a claim of chronic pain and the evidence type again varied between image and graph. The expected neuroimage bias was not found, in that jurors were more likely to find in favor of the plaintiff when either side proffered the image, but more likely to find for the defense when only graphs were offered by the experts. These findings suggest that the introduction of neuroimages as evidence may affect jurors punitiveness in criminal cases, as well as liability decisions in civil cases and overall serves to illustrate that the influence of neuroscientific information on legal decision makers is more complex than originally thought.
ContributorsHafdahl, Riquel J (Author) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Thesis advisor) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Neal, Tess (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
Description
In 2009, Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. was arrested when he was mistaken for a burglar outside his home. When he went to the media, claiming to be a victim of racism, he faced backlash from other African Americans. The current research attempts to explain why he faced this backlash in terms of racial ingroup betrayal. Participants read a vignette that was similar to the Gates Jr. case, with SES and Job Stereotypicality being modified to be stereotypical or counter-stereotypical to one’s race. Data analyses revealed support for my hypotheses of Whites participants. There was a significant interaction, such that White participants felt more betrayed by low (versus high) SES ingroup members who achieved their financial means through counter-stereotypical careers, which in turn led to reduced ingroup protectiveness for the ingroup member (i.e., a shorter suspension for the policeman who mistreated the ingroup member). In contrast, they did not feel more betrayed by low (versus high) SES ingroup members when they had stereotypical jobs. Minority participants, (i.e., African-American and Hispanic participants) felt more betrayed by an ingroup member who had a stereotypical career compared to a counter-stereotypical career. In sum, I found that among White participants only, they feel betrayed when an ingroup member violates their expectations for what they believe an ingroup member should be in terms of SES and career choice, which might lead them to be less protective when an ingroup member is mistreated.
ContributorsAnderson, Kyle Matthew (Author) / Salerno, Jessica (Thesis advisor) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Committee member) / Hall, Deborah (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
Description
Interest in health and wellness has significantly increased in today's society. Living a healthy and active lifestyle is suggested to promote overall physical and psychological well-being. This study explored the effects of wearing a Fitbit Zip activity monitor and the impact of expressing mindfulness on levels of physical activity. It was predicted that expressing mindfulness, as measured by the use of present-tense language during the daily emotional writing task, would moderate the relationship between wearing a Fitbit Zip activity monitor and change in physical activity. Specifically, it was hypothesized daily monitoring would only lead to increased activity among those higher in mindful language. Over the course of five days, participants were asked to wear a Fitbit Zip and to complete a daily questionnaire and writing task at the end of each evening. On the last day of the study, participants completed a follow-up assessment, which suggested that the combination of wearing a Fitbit Zip activity monitor and expressing more mindfulness throughout the week increased levels of physical activity. An important issue for future research is to conduct this study for a longer period of time in order to get more variability in the data. However, despite the limitations of the design, these findings suggest that activity monitoring may be a promising way to promote healthy lifestyle change.
ContributorsTarachiu, Viorela (Author) / Newman, Matt L. (Thesis advisor) / Hall, Deborah (Committee member) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
A sample of 193 participants viewed one of six variations of an eyewitness giving mock testimony. Each participant viewed testimony, which varied by level of emotion (none, moderate, or high) and frame (waist-up or head only). Participants then rated the witness using the Brodsky Witness Credibility Scale and the Reyson Likability Scale. A set of ANOVA's was performed revealing an effect of emotion level on both credibility and likability. Emotion level was found to influence participant judgments of poise, however, to a lesser degree than judgments of credibility and likability. These results suggest that attorneys may want to avoid the use of videoconferencing with certain types of witnesses where testimony may be highly emotional.
ContributorsHavener, Shannon (Author) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Thesis advisor) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Hall, Deborah (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
A substantial amount of research has been dedicated to understanding how and why innocent people confess to crimes that they did not commit. Unfortunately, false confessions occur even with the best possible interrogation practices. This study aimed to examine how different types of false confession (voluntary, compliance, and internalization) and the use of jury instructions specific to confessions influences jurors’ verdicts. A sample of 414 participants read a criminal trial case summary that presented one of four reasons why the defendant falsely confessed followed by either the standard jury instruction for confessions or a clarified version. Afterwards, participants completed several items assessing the perceived guilt of the defendant, their attitudes on confessions in general, and their opinions on jury instructions. Although the three confession reasons did not differ among one another, jurors who were given no explanation for the false confession tended to more harshly judge the defendant. Further, the clarified jury instructions did not influence the participants’ judgments. Future research should focus on how expert witness testimonies affect verdicts regarding each type of false confession reason and whether the media may influence a juror’s knowledge of factors that could provoke false confessions.
ContributorsPollack, Andrew Christian (Author) / Schweitzer, Nicholas (Thesis advisor) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Neal, Tess (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
Description
In recent years, the use of biologically based (neurological, neuropsychological, genetic) evidence in criminal trials as support for claims of mental impairments among offenders has increased in popularity. However, research on how exposure to those arguments affects jury decision-making remains unclear. Specifically, arguments rooted in biology sometimes mitigate and sometimes aggravate judgments of criminal responsibility for mentally ill offenders, and this discrepancy seems to stem from the specific conditions by which that disorder was acquired. The following study’s aim was to uncover the precise mechanism(s) behind this elusive effect. Utilizing a 2x2 between subjects experimental design, participants were presented with a hypothetical crime summary involving an offender with either an onset controllable or uncontrollable mental disorder. Ratings of criminal responsibility and other variables hypothesized to function as mediators were obtained after presentation of a prime supporting either a biologically deterministic or free will argument for human behavior in general. Results indicated that when the defendant’s disorder was the result of the his own actions (onset controllable), a biological prime decreased judgments of criminal responsibility; however, when the disorder was caused by factors out of his control (onset uncontrollable), the prime increased judgments of criminal responsibility. An examination of several possible mechanisms finds the effect mediated by the perception of control the defendant could have had over his own actions at the time of the crime. These results suggest that perceptions of behavioral control are an important contributor to jurors’ formation of criminal responsibility judgments when an offender possesses a mental illness; and arguments advocating a biological basis for human behavior reliably affect blame attribution, suggesting that a societal shift in the perception of free will as a result of increased exposure to biology in general may alter the framework of criminal responsibility judgments.
ContributorsHunter, Shelby (Author) / Schweitzer, Nick (Thesis advisor) / Neal, Tess (Committee member) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
Description
Sexual minorities use social media platforms at higher rates than heterosexual individuals, often to find and connect with other sexual minorities and the broader online LGBTQ+ community. These online connections may help normalize feelings and experiences as a sexual minority in a heterosexual-normed society by increasing exposure to more meaningful reference groups and helping to mitigate the negative impact of heterosexist norms. There has been relatively little research investigating online social connectedness (OSC) among sexual minority adults, the relation between OSC and positive psychological outcomes, and the role of OSC in lessening the impact of heterosexist norms. The goal of the present thesis was to examine the relation between OSC and positive psychological outcomes, and whether such a relation is mediated by compulsory heterosexuality (CH; i.e., heterosexist norms) and internalized heterosexism (IH; i.e., internalizing and accepting heterosexist norms). A sample of 298 sexual minority adults in the U.S. completed an online survey that included measures of OSC, CH, IH, and positive psychological outcomes including resilience, well-being, self-acceptance, and self-esteem. The hypothesized model, with CH and IH as serial mediators of the relation between OSC and positive psychological outcomes, along with a series of alternative models, were tested using structural equation modeling. Support was found for the hypothesized model, such that greater OSC predicted lower CH, which then predicted lower IH, which in turn predicted greater positive psychological outcomes. While several alternative models had adequate fit, the hypothesized model was best supported statistically and by previous literature. These findings provide insights into the psychological benefits of social media connections for sexual minorities and the potential for OSC to lessen the impact of heterosexist norms. This study also adds to the existing literature regarding OSC and sexual minority adults, expanding the literature from primarily focusing on sexual minority youth. Future studies should be more socio-demographically diverse and longitudinal in nature in order to help better understand the directionality of the relationship between CH and IH. The present findings may also inform the development of interventions aimed at decreasing CH and IH, which future studies should investigate more fully.
ContributorsBaumel, Katie (Author) / Hall, Deborah (Thesis advisor) / Mickelson, Kristin (Committee member) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021
Description
The purpose of this research was to investigate the effect of the type of crime (namely, its perceived immorality) a juvenile is suspected of on how juvenile suspects are perceived (in terms of moral character, immaturity, and suggestibility) and, in turn, interrogated. I expected act-person dissociation to influence that effect. To that end, perceptions of crime (i.e., immorality, seriousness) were also investigated. The study was first conducted with law enforcement officers (n = 55), then replicated with laypeople (n = 171). Participants were randomly assigned to one of three crime conditions: robbery, sexual assault, and murder. In each condition, participants read a probable cause statement involving a 15-year-old suspect. There were several key findings: (1) Murder was the most serious crime, whereas robbery and sexual assault were more immoral. (2) Act-person dissociation did not occur. (3) Participants were more likely to endorse the use of psychologically coercive tactics on the juvenile suspected of sexual assault than the juvenile suspected of murder. (4) The more favorably participants perceived a juvenile’s moral character, the less likely they were to endorse the use of psychologically coercive interrogation tactics. (4) Participants who more strongly agreed that juveniles are more immature and suggestible than adults were less likely to endorse the use of psychologically coercive tactics, more likely to endorse the use of tactics that encourage compliance with interrogators, and more likely to adhere to the PEACE model of juvenile interrogations. The implications and limitations of these findings are discussed, along with potential directions for future research.
ContributorsFaison, Lakia (Author) / Mickelson, Kristin (Thesis advisor) / Smalarz, Laura (Committee member) / Salerno, Jessica (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021