home     about     contact    

Archive of selected writings:

_______________________

Novel Scientific Evidence and Controversial Cases: A Social
Psychological Examination, John S. DeWitt, James T. Richardson
& Lyle G. Warner, 21 Law & Psychology Review, 1 (1997).

Law and Psychology Review

____________________

Novel Scientific Evidence and the Juror

DeWitt, John S.

1991
(PhD Dissertation)

Novel Scientific Evidence and the Juror
PDF version  - view or download here

Abstract

The research investigated some potential limitations on the ability of jurors to reach fair and impartial decisions in a case involving novel scientific evidence.  It was hypothesized that preexisting juror biases would adversely affect juror decisions, as would the expert testimony offered, whether reliable or unreliable (because jurors would give it undue weight when it supported their preexisting biases).  These two variables were tested in a 2 x 2 factorial design.  The effects of two other variables - need for cognition and locus of control, were also tested.

A mock jury methodology was employed in which 64 subjects heard testimony in a case involving allegations of brainwashing by religious cults.  Jurors then responded to attitude assessment instruments, deliberated, and reached individual verdicts, and once again responded to attitude assessment instruments.

In accordance with predictions, jurors with stronger attitude schemas (preexisting biases) exhibited significantly stronger pro-plaintiff attitudes on pre and post-deliberation attitude measures.  Two other independent variables, expert testimony and juror locus of control, were also found to be significantly related to some of dependent measures.  Only one independent variable, juror need for cognition, was significantly related to actual verdicts however; jurors who were high in need for cognition tended to find for the defendant, and those low in need for cognition tended to find for the plaintiff.  The research has implications for the Frye-relevancy controversy, which involves whether to allow as evidence expert testimony that has not achieved general acceptance within a specifically relevant field.

The findings support the hypothesis that jurors who are low in motivation are not as likely as others to scrutinize the issue-relevant arguments in such cases, and are more likely to be guided by their initial biases.  They also support the contention of those who support the Frye doctrine for the admissibility of novel scientific evidence that unreliable expert testimony might unduly influence jurors and therefore should be disallowed.

_____________________________


Title: The Impact of Court-Annexed Arbitration on the Pace, Cost, and Quality of Civil Justice in Clark County, Nevada

Author: DeWitt, John S., Dobbin, Shirley A. and Gatowski, Sophia

Date: 1994

Synopsis:

To address the problem of a rapid increase in court caseloads, the Supreme Court of Nevada established a system of mandatory, non-binding arbitration for cases valued at less than $25,000 in Clark and Washoe Counties. The programs started on July 1, 1992. An evaluation of the program in Clark County compared 483 cases that were mediated to 514 cases that were filed in 1990. Additionally, questionnaires were sent to litigants and attorneys, interviews were conducted with court personnel, and focus groups were conducted with arbitrators and attorneys who had experience with arbitration. The study found that a trial de novo was requested in 25.9% of cases, that the arbitration program reduced the district court civil caseload by over 40%, that the pace of litigation was quickened, that costs to the litigants were reported to be lower, that the costs to the state are minimal, and that the program had a positive effect on the quality of justice.

Publisher: State Justice Institute

_______________________________