Matching Items (2)
Filtering by
- Creators: Pardini, Dustin
- Creators: Berry, Megan Cheyenne
Description
By providing vignettes with manipulated scientific evidence, this research examined if including more or less scientific detail affected decision-making in regards to the death penalty. Participants were randomly assigned one of the two manipulations (less science and more science) after reading a short scenario introducing the mock capital trial and their role as jury members. Survey respondents were told that a jury had previously found the defendant guilty and they would now deliberate the appropriate punishment. Before being exposed to the manipulation, respondents answered questions pertaining to their prior belief in the death penalty, as well as their level of support of procedural justice and science. These questions provided a baseline to compare to their sentencing decision. Participants were then asked what sentence they would impose \u2014 life in prison or death \u2014 and how the fMRI evidence presented by an expert witness for the defense affected their decision. Both quantitative and qualitative measures were used to identify how the level of scientific detail affected their decision. Our intended predictor variable (level of scientific detail) did not affect juror decision-making. In fact, the qualitative results revealed a variety of interpretations of the scientific evidence used both in favor of death and in favor of life. When looking at what did predict juror decision-making, gender, prior belief in the death penalty, and political ideology all were significant predictors. As in previous literature, the fMRI evidence in our study had mixed results with regards to implementation of the death penalty. This held true in both of our manipulations, showing that despite the level of detail in evidence intended for mitigation, jurors with preconceived notions may still disregard the evidence, and some jurors may even view it is aggravating and thus increase the likelihood of a death sentence for a defendant with such brain abnormalities.
ContributorsBerry, Megan Cheyenne (Author) / Fradella, Hank (Thesis director) / Pardini, Dustin (Committee member) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-12
Description
Although the interpersonal (e.g., deceitful, manipulative, grandiose) and affective (e.g., lack of empathy/guilt) features of adult psychopathy have been associated with an increased risk for criminal activity (Boccio & Beaver, 2018; Hare, 1993; Porter, Birt, & Boer, 2001), there remains a subgroup of individuals with these features who are able to avoid being convicted of a serious crime. However, it remains unclear what factors differentiate individuals with high psychopathic traits who are convicted for serious offending from those who are not convicted. To address this gap, the current study aims to answer the following: 1.) Do economic, social, or intelligence factors differentiate convicted versus non-convicted individuals with high psychopathic traits? and 2.) Are non-convicted individuals with high psychopathic traits less likely to engage in self-report offending than convicted individuals with these traits? Data was drawn from the youngest and oldest cohorts of the Pittsburgh Youth Study (N=806), a longitudinal study that followed adolescent (ages 13-16) males from Pittsburgh, PA over 22 years in order to examine the development of delinquency, substance use, and mental health problems. Significant between-group differences were examined using ANOVA and chi-squared analyses. Results showed no difference between convicted and non-convicted men with high psychopathic traits in terms of intelligence or relationship quality. However, non-convicted men with high psychopathic traits were more likely to be employed and less likely to be on public assistance that men with high psychopathic traits. Further, high psychopathic trait non-convicted men were less likely to report adult offending than their convicted counterparts, but were more likely to offend than men with low psychopathic traits who were not convicted. These results suggest that men with high psychopathic traits who elude conviction exhibit better adult adjustment than men with these characteristics that have been convicted, even though they report engaging in adult offending.
ContributorsKrob, Casaundra Kendal (Author) / Pardini, Dustin (Thesis director) / Sweeten, Gary (Committee member) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor) / School of Social and Behavioral Sciences (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05