Introduction and validation of the Juror Decision Scale (JDS): An empirical investigation of the Story Model

Abstract

To develop and validate a self-report measure of individual juror decision making within criminal trials, based on theoretical features set out in the Story Model of juror decision making. Methods: The Juror Decision Scale (JDS) and Acceptance of Modern Myths about Sexual Aggression (AMMSA) measure were completed by 324 jury-eligible participants split across 27 jury panels, after observing a rape trial re-enactment high in ecological validity. Dimensionality and construct validity of the JDS was investigated using traditional confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) techniques alongside confirmatory bifactor analysis at two time points (individual juror verdict decisions pre-and post-deliberation). Three competing models of the JDS were specified and tested using Mplus with maximum likelihood robust estimation. Results: Bifactor model with three meaningful factors (complainant believability, defendant believability, decision confidence) was the best fit for the data at both decision points. Good composite reliability and differential predictive validity were observed for the three JDS subscales. Conclusion: Alongside demonstrating its multidimensional conceptualisation, the JDS development permits future empirical testing of the Story Model theoretical assertions surrounding juror decision making. Present findings also provide early evidence of a certainty principle assessment process governing individual verdict decision formation. Theoretical and practical applications are discussed.

Italian Validation of the Touch Avoidance Measure and the Touch Avoidance Questionnaire

“…Moreover, after recoding, all response categories had data, allowing CFA models to converge. For evaluating goodness of fit, we followed Hu and Bentler's (1999) conservative recommendations of comparative fit index (CFI) and Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) > 0.95 and root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) < 0.06 as indicating excellent fit, guidelines widely followed in modern SEM research (Boduszek et al, 2016;Willmott et al, 2018). Touch Avoidance Questionnaire items 6, 10, 12, 13, 15, and 36 were excluded from the final version of the test by the original authors (Ozolins and Sandberg, 2009).…”

Police Officer Perceptions of Non-consensual Dissemination of Intimate Images

“…As most sexual offenses are non-stranger assaults, tangible evidence is often lacking, leaving room for different competing narratives as to what really happened and to personal inferences and bias (Willmott et al, 2018).…”

“…Even though neutrality and objectivity of law enforcement is emphasized, real-life circumstances show that reality is more complex, especially with respect to sexual offenses. As most sexual offenses are non-stranger assaults, tangible evidence is often lacking, leaving room for different competing narratives as to what really happened and to personal inferences and bias ( Willmott et al, 2018 ).…”

Is It Harassment? Perceptions of Sexual Harassment Among Lawyers and Undergraduate Students

“…The findings show that while neutrality and objectivity are stressed in these domains, real-life circumstances often suggest a different more biased reality. There is strong evidence that social attitudes affect conduct in the legal and justice systems, infecting them with myths and stereotypes common in general society (Rumney, 2009;Page, 2010;Willmott et al, 2018;Shechory-Bitton and Jaeger, 2019). For example, Temkin and Krahe (2007) conducted a detailed analysis on the impact of social attitudes on law enforcement in cases of rape perpetrated against women.…”