The Role of Emotion and Cognition in Juror Perceptions of Victim Impact Statements

Effects of Emotional Testimony and Gruesome Photographs on Mock Jurors' Decisions and Negative Emotions

“…In United States jury trials as well as those in many other countries, the victim impact testimony is usually presented after a guilty verdict is rendered during the sentencing phase; therefore, most research about victim impact testimony has focused on its effect on sentencing decisions (Greene, Koehring, & Quiat, 1998;McGowan & Myers, 2004). A number of studies have reported that victim impact testimony has led mock jurors to render harsher sentences (Forsterlee, Fox, Forsterlee, & Ho, 2004;Greene et al, 1998;McGowan & Myers, 2004;Myers, Godwin, Latter, & Winstanley, 2004;Wevodau, Cramer, Clark, & Kehn, 2014). For example, mock jurors who heard victim impact testimony voted for the death penalty more often than mock jurors who did not hear the testimony, regardless of the degree of aggravation in the case (Luginbuhl & Burkhead, 1995).…”

Emotions, Crime Seriousness, and Alibi Believability

“…Past research strongly supports the assertion that emotions can impact juror decision-making (e.g., Georges, Wiener, & Keller, 2013;Semmler et al, 2002). A great deal of existing literature regarding emotions and juror decision-making has focused on the effects of victim impact statements and emotional evidence (e.g., Boppre & Miller, 2014;Matsuo & Itoh, 2016;Wevodau et al, 2014) as well as on the impact of the demeanour of defendants, witnesses, and victims (e.g., Golding, Fryman, Marsil, & Yozwiak, 2003;Pryor & Buchanan, 1984). A number of studies have also examined mock jurors' emotional responses to gruesome evidence (e.g., Bright & Goodman-Delahunty, 2004;Bright & Goodman-Delahunty, 2006;Douglas, Lyon, & Ogloff, 1997).…”

“…As a result of the inherently unpleasant nature of criminal trials, juror decision-making is often an emotionally charged process. Despite the historical presumption of juror impartiality -e.g., R v Spence (2005), -the observation that emotions can influence juror decision-making has been widely documented (e.g., Semmler, Brewer, Tomkins, & Small, 2002;Wevodau, Cramer, Clark, & Kehn, 2014). Furthermore, it has been theorized that when jurors ignore the law and rely on their emotions, resulting judgments become chaotic (Horowitz, Kerr, Park, & Gockel, 2006).…”

The Effects of Limiting Instructions about Emotional Evidence Depend on Need for Cognition

“…A number of studies have shown that mock jurors who are exposed to VISs render harsher sentences than those who are not (ForsterLee, Fox, ForsterLee, & Ho, 2004;Greene, Koehring, & Quiat, 1998;McGowan & Myers, 2004). Although VISs are usually presented during the sentencing phase in capital trials in many countries, it has recently become common in the United States to present these in noncapital trials (Wevodau, Cramer, Clark, & Kehn, 2014). They are also presented during the culpability phase in Japan because the proceedings are not separated into two phases of culpability and sentencing, which implies that VISs may influence not only sentencing but also verdict decisions.…”