NCJ Number
69297
Journal
Law and Human Behavior Volume: 3 Issue: 4 Dated: (1979) Pages: 251-260
Date Published
1980
Length
10 pages
Annotation
THE REAL-WORLD CONSEQUENTIALITY OF SUBJECTS' VERDICTS, THE PRESENCE OF MITIGATING TESTIMONY, AND THE SOURCE AND CREDIBILITY OF MITIGATING TESTIMONY WERE MANIPULATED IN ORDER TO TEST THEIR EFFECTS ON THE SEVERITY OF PENALTIES.
Abstract
THE SUBJECTS WERE 184 UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS ENROLLED IN AN INTRODUCTORY PSYCHOLOGY COURSE, WHICH CONTAINED EQUAL NUMBERS OF MALES AND FEMALES. EACH SUBJECT WAS GIVEN A PACKET OF MATERIALS CONSISTING OF DIRECTIONS, THE FACTS OF THE CASE, AND THE RATING SCALES FOR THE DEPENDENT MEASURES, (ASSIGNMENT OF PENALTY AND THE SUBJECT'S PERCEPTION OF THE LENIENCY OR STRICTNESS OF THE PUNISHMENT THEY ASSIGNED) AND MANIPULATION CHECKS. THE RESULTS SHOWED THAT AMONG THE SUBJECTS WHOSE DECISIONS WERE THOUGHT TO BE OF NO CONSEQUENCE, NONE OF THE OTHER MANIPULATED VARIABLES PRODUCED ANY RELIABLE DIFFERENCES. YET AMONG THOSE WHO THOUGHT THEIR DECISIONS WERE OF REAL CONSEQUENCE, LESS SEVERE PENALTIES WERE GIVEN WHEN MITIGATING TESTIMONY WAS PRESENTED, AS OPPOSED TO WHEN IT WAS NOT, AND THIS WAS TRUE REGARDLESS OF THE TESTIMONY'S SOURCE. THUS, INDUCING A SENSE OF CONSEQUENCE IN SIMULATED JURY STUDIES IS IMPORTANT. DEFENDANTS SHOULD INDEED PRESENT MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES TO THOSE WHO HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF IMPOSING PUNISHMENT. MOREOVER, THE FAVORABLE TESTIMONY WILL PRODUCE MORE LENIENT PENALTIES WHETHER IT COMES FROM A THIRD PARTY OR THE DEFENDANT, AND, WHETHER IT IS MORE OR LESS CREDIBLE. REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)