The impact of justice and vengance motives on sentencing decisions

The present study was designed to address the question of how justice and vengeance motives may impact differentially on the severity of punishment meted out to offenders. Based on the systematic-heuristic model of decision-making, it was hypothesized that (a) vengeance motives will exert a greater indirect influence on punitive judgement, being mediated by the source characteristic of 'mitigating circumstances', than a direct influence, and (b) justice motives will exert a greater direct rather than an indirect influence on punitive judgements. Results from a path analysis are generally consistent with these predictions. Multi-group path analysis yielded no significant gender differences in the way that justice and vengeance motives influenced the severity of the punitive judgements. The implications of these findings are discussed

The impact of note-taking and justice-vengeance motives on juror decision-making in a criminal murder trial

This study examined the effects of note-taking and justice-vengeance motives on juror decision making in a criminal trial. The study predicted that (1) jurors who took notes would render more appropriate decisions and recall more evidentiary content, (2) jurors high in vengeance would sentence the defendant more harshly and recall less probative information, and (3) note-taking would interact with justice and vengeance motives and impact upon sentencing and the recall of information. The sample of 149 jury eligible participants recruited from the Central Queensland community were assigned to one of two conditions (note-taking or non note-taking). All participants viewed the same murder trial and subsequently, rendered a verdict and sentencing decision, as well as recalled the trial facts. Lastly, they completed the Justice-Vengeance scale (Ho, ForsterLee, ForsterLee, & Crofts, 2002). Results of the study indicated that (1) jurors who took notes recalled more probative information than their non note-taking counterparts, (2) jurors high in vengeance sentenced the defendant more harshly and recalled fewer case-related facts, and (3) note-taking offset the vengeance motive for punishment, suggesting that note-taking would be a useful memory aid for vengeance-oriented jurors. The implications of these findings are discussed, as well as recommendations for future research in the field of juror decision-making

The impact of justice and vengance motives on sentencing decisions

The present study was designed to address the question of how justice and vengeance motives may impact differentially on the severity of punishment meted out to offenders. Based on the systematic-heuristic model of decision-making, it was hypothesized that (a) vengeance motives will exert a greater indirect influence on punitive judgement, being mediated by the source characteristic of 'mitigating circumstances', than a direct influence, and (b) justice motives will exert a greater direct rather than an indirect influence on punitive judgements. Results from a path analysis are generally consistent with these predictions. Multi-group path analysis yielded no significant gender differences in the way that justice and vengeance motives influenced the severity of the punitive judgements. The implications of these findings are discussed

The effects of a victim impact statement and gender on juror information processing in a criminal trial : does the punishment fit the crime?

This study examines the effects of a victim impact statement (VIS) and gender on decision making. A total of 238 jury-eligible participants from the community were randomly assigned to one of eight versions of a heinous murder trial, based on real case. Half the participants received a VIS, while the remainder did not. In addition, the design manipulated offender and victim gender. When no VIS was presented, male defendants received harsher sentences than females. The inclusion of the VIS decreased the disparity, resulting in a more severe sentence for the female, while the male offender's sentence was unaffected. The harsher sentence appeared to be the result of an increase in the perceived deviancy (as measured by volition and future dangerousness) of the female offender, due to the VIS.The interpretation was supported by the higher ratings of "anger" against the female defendant when the VIS was included. The sentences rendered by male jurors were predicted by the ratings of "future dangerousness", "volition" and the VIS, whereas sentencing of females was predicted only by future dangerousness and the volition scores. The implications of these findings are discussed

Pre-trial print publicity in Australian print media : eliciting bias effects on juror decision making

Guided by the Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM) of information processing, this study investigated the impact of Pre-trial Publicity (PTP) (informational/emotional), and Crime Type (intentional/unintentional) as a measure of complexity on mock juror decision-making. Ninety-nine (35 male, 64 female) jury eligible (aged 18-65) members from within the Queensland population participated in this study. Participants read two newspaper articles that contained either informational publicity (such as prior convuctions), or emotional publicity (emotive details about the victim), followed by a trial transcript summary before rendering verdict and sentencing decisions. Overall the results of this study suggest that mock jurors are influenced in their information processing by extra-legal factors. The principal findings demonstrate that PTP seves as anextra-legal factor when jurors render their judgements. Participants exposed to emotional PTP render harsher sentencing decisions than participants exposed to informational publicity. Further, complexity, defined in this study by Crime Type, revealed that jurors tend to search for additional informationin the form of a heuristic cue PTP. Thus, the study found that mock jurors confronted with complex trial evidence and exposed to emotional PTP delivered harsher sentencing decisions

The effects of jury-aid innovations on juror performance in complex civil trials

The effects of jury-aid innovations on juror performance in complex civil trial

Dealing with the guilty offender

"Sentencing is the imposition of a legal sanction on a person convicted of a criminal offense. The typical participants in sentencing decisions are the sentencer (judge or magistrate), counsel for the prosecution, the offender, and his or her legal representative(s). In some instances, community and family members may participate, including the crime victim or his or her representatives.

Justice versus vengeance : motives underlying punitive judgements

The present study was designed to address the question of whether justice and vengeance motives can be differentiated and clearly delineated within the judicial process. The study used a multi-stage approach in the development of the Justice-Vengeance Scale. Exploratory factor analysis (102 males, 118 females) and confirmatory factor analysis (123 males, 200 females) yielded a four-factor multi-dimensional measure that differentiates between attitudes toward justice and vengeance, as well as between different dimensions underlying these motives (vengeance-sentence, vengeance-emotion, justice-fairness, justice-legal). The implications and utility of the Justice-Vengeance scale in future research are discussed

The impact of note-taking and justice-vengeance motives on juror decision-making in a criminal murder trial

This study examined the effects of note-taking and justice-vengeance motives on juror decision making in a criminal trial. The study predicted that (1) jurors who took notes would render more appropriate decisions and recall more evidentiary content, (2) jurors high in vengeance would sentence the defendant more harshly and recall less probative information, and (3) note-taking would interact with justice and vengeance motives and impact upon sentencing and the recall of information. The sample of 149 jury eligible participants recruited from the Central Queensland community were assigned to one of two conditions (note-taking or non note-taking). All participants viewed the same murder trial and subsequently, rendered a verdict and sentencing decision, as well as recalled the trial facts. Lastly, they completed the Justice-Vengeance scale (Ho, ForsterLee, ForsterLee, & Crofts, 2002). Results of the study indicated that (1) jurors who took notes recalled more probative information than their non note-taking counterparts, (2) jurors high in vengeance sentenced the defendant more harshly and recalled fewer case-related facts, and (3) note-taking offset the vengeance motive for punishment, suggesting that note-taking would be a useful memory aid for vengeance-oriented jurors. The implications of these findings are discussed, as well as recommendations for future research in the field of juror decision-making

The effects of a victim impact statement and gender on juror information processing in a criminal trial : does the punishment fit the crime?

This study examines the effects of a victim impact statement (VIS) and gender on decision making. A total of 238 jury-eligible participants from the community were randomly assigned to one of eight versions of a heinous murder trial, based on real case. Half the participants received a VIS, while the remainder did not. In addition, the design manipulated offender and victim gender. When no VIS was presented, male defendants received harsher sentences than females. The inclusion of the VIS decreased the disparity, resulting in a more severe sentence for the female, while the male offender's sentence was unaffected. The harsher sentence appeared to be the result of an increase in the perceived deviancy (as measured by volition and future dangerousness) of the female offender, due to the VIS.The interpretation was supported by the higher ratings of "anger" against the female defendant when the VIS was included. The sentences rendered by male jurors were predicted by the ratings of "future dangerousness", "volition" and the VIS, whereas sentencing of females was predicted only by future dangerousness and the volition scores. The implications of these findings are discussed