Jane Goodman-Delahunty

Training in Law and Psychology: Models from the Villanova Conference

Although the domain of law and psychology is a burgeoning and popular field of study, there has never been a concerted effort to evaluate current training models or to develop newer, more effective ones. Forty-eight invited participants attended a national conference held at Villanova Law School to remedy this deficiency. Working groups addressed issues of education and training for the undergraduate level; for doctoral-level programs in law and social science; for forensic clinical training; for joint-degree (JD/PhD-PsyD) programs; for those in practica, internships, and postdoctoral programs; and for continuing education. This article delineates levels and models of training in each of these areas.

Forensic Psychological Expertise in the Wake of Daubert

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. established guidelines for screening the admissibility of scientific evidence and overruled the Frye “general acceptance” doctrine. Guidelines more akin to those advocated by psychologists to assess the trustworthiness of the expert testimony were established in light of the Federal Rules of Evidence on the reliability, relevance, and prejudicial or probative nature of the information. Forensic psychological experts will have to be explicit about the scientific foundations of their opinions. The more flexible formula for the admission of scientific evidence may exert greater quality control than the Frye test, and enhance the relationship of psychology and law by eliminating some sources of controversy within the professional community over expert witnesses. Research needs flowing from the new standards are identified.

The Influence of Gruesome Verbal Evidence on Mock Juror Verdicts

Judges assume that gruesome evidence can influence juror verdicts. Legal safeguards such as exclusionary evidentiary doctrines are in place to protect defendants against the misuse of visual gruesome evidence by jurors. However, little is known about the impact of gruesome evidence on juror decision-making. The current study investigated the hypothesis that convictions are more likely in cases in which gruesome evidence is admitted. When inculpatory evidence was held constant, 34.4% of mock jurors presented with gruesome evidence convicted the defendant, whereas only 13.9% of the mock jurors who reviewed no gruesome evidence did so. When inculpatory evidence was legally insufficient for conviction and gruesome evidence was presented, mock jurors rated the likelihood of the guilt of the defendant significantly higher compared with ratings from mock jurors to whom no gruesome facts were presented. The presence of gruesome facts also significantly enhanced the inculpatory value of one item in evidence.

A comparison of expert evidence and judicial directions to counter misconceptions in child sexual abuse trials

Studies on the influence of expert evidence and judicial instructions in child sexual abuse (CSA) cases have produced mixed outcomes. Using repeated measures, we tested the effectiveness of expert evidence and judicial directions in challenging common misconceptions about children’s memory and responses to sexual abuse. A CSA Misconceptions Questionnaire was administered to 118 psychology undergraduates who later served as virtual jurors in a simulated criminal trial. Specialized CSA knowledge was provided by a psychologist or via judicial directions. Expert evidence had two levels: clinical versus scientific testimony. Timing of judicial instructions had two levels: directions presented before the child testified versus during the judge’s summing up. In a fifth control condition, no specialized CSA information was included. After reading a trial transcript, mock-jurors assessed witness credibility, rendered verdicts and again completed the CSA Misconceptions Questionnaire. All four interventions significantly increased jurors’ CSA knowledge. The more they knew, the more likely they were to convict. Perceived victim credibility fully mediated the effect of CSA knowledge on verdict: information presented via expert testimony or judicial directions enhanced perceptions of victim credibility, which in turn increased convictions. Conviction rates were significantly higher in response to expert testimony from a clinical psychologist and a judicial instruction provided in the trial summation. These results are promising for courts and policy-makers grappling with low conviction rates in CSA jury trials.

Uncertainty and Misconceptions About Child Sexual Abuse: Implications for the Criminal Justice System

Recent amendments to the uniform evidence legislation in Australia mean that it will be possible for prosecutors to call expert opinion evidence to bolster the credibility of child complainants in child sexual assault (CSA) trials. Yet little is known about the extent of the common beliefs and misconceptions in the Australian population about child sexual abuse and the degree of discord between their beliefs and what the research literature shows. A survey investigated the knowledge and misconceptions of 659 laypeople about childrens memory, reliability, suggestibility and childrens responses to sexual abuse, and explored demographic differences in child sexual abuse misconceptions in an Australian jury-eligible sample. Reported here are the first published results on the perceptions and beliefs of Australian citizens regarding factors that influence the outcomes in CSA cases. An important contribution was significant findings of extensive uncertainty regarding these topics. Results showed that gender, age and educational attainment were associated with the endorsement of misconceptions about CSA cases. Topics that expert evidence can address to remedy these knowledge deficits were identified.

The Influence of Limiting Instructions on Processing and Judgments of Emotionally Evocative Evidence

Most jury instructions are issued after all the evidence has been presented in a trial; however, some are given during the trial. When gruesome photographs form part of the evidence in criminal culpability proceedings, the judge will usually instruct jurors to be dispassionate in examining the evidence. This study investigated whether time of presentation affects the ability of limiting instructions to cure the potentially prejudicial effects of gruesome photographic evidence by measuring the emotions, cognitions and verdicts of 108 mock jurors in a simulated murder trial. Pre-instructed participants processed evidence in the defendants favour and rendered significantly fewer convictions than did post-instructed participants and those who received no limiting instructions. Gruesome photographs did not bias processing of other items in evidence or verdicts, although they elicited significantly greater victim compassion and crime negativity than did neutral photographs. Results suggest that jury instructions are more conducive to compliance when presented early in the evidence-processing task than when presented late.

Enhancing the credibility of complainants in child sexual assault trials: The effect of expert evidence and judicial directions†

This study investigated the knowledge and misconceptions of jury-eligible citizens about childrens reliability as witnesses and responses to child sexual assault (CSA), and examined the influence of expert evidence and judicial directions in challenging common misconceptions. Community volunteers (N = 130) read one of five versions of a simulated jury trial, and completed a pre- and post-trial questionnaire to provide measures of their knowledge of childrens responses to sexual abuse, perceptions of victim credibility, and verdict. Results revealed that endorsement of CSA misconceptions negatively impacted ratings of complainant credibility and verdicts. Judicial directions provided before the child complainant testified enhanced complainant credibility, which in turn predicted guilty verdicts. Comparisons of the effectiveness of two procedural legal mechanisms to manage juror misconceptions and improve knowledge about CSA provide guidance for future researchers investigating ways to increase fairness in cases of CSA.

DNA and the changing face of justice

Abstract Focusing on the impact of DNA evidence in jury trials, evidence for the existence of multiple posited forms of the “CSI effect” is reviewed. The most popular version of the effect, that it produces unrealistic expectations of the prosecution and thus results in unwarranted acquittals, remains unsupported. The converse effect, that unwarranted convictions result from the overweighting of DNA expert evidence, has received some support from archival analyses, a substantial field study, and several simulation studies. The precise factors that produce these trends are yet not well-understood. Future research should examine the source of these findings, explore ways to assist jurors in according DNA evidence appropriate probative weight, and take into account the influence of jury deliberations.

Juror decisions about damages in employment discrimination cases

This article examines influences on mock juror and jury decision making regarding damages in an employment discrimination case. We examined the effects of expert economic testimony, suggested awards, and conflicting economic testimony on decisions regarding lost wages and benefits and pain and suffering. Participants heard excerpts of an age discrimination lawsuit in which liability had previously been determined in the plaintiffs favor. We varied whether suggested awards were included and if so, whether they were presented by attorneys, a plaintiffs expert economist, or both a plaintiffs and defendants expert economist. Results tentatively showed that attorneys suggestions were not persuasive and that the effects of expert testimony depend on its nature and on the particular decision task at hand. Copyright

Using multimedia to support jury understanding of DNA profiling evidence

Jury difficulties in understanding and according suitable weight to probabilistic scientific expert evidence about DNA profiling are well established. Traditional legal aids, including note-taking and allowing jury questions, have had limited success in diminishing their problems. This study examined the potential of multimedia instruction to enhance jury comprehension. Mock jurors reviewed a homicide case in which DNA evidence linked the suspect to the crime scene. Instructional media on ‘Forensic DNA Technology’ and/or ‘Random Match Probability’ accompanied the oral expert evidence to support juror understanding. Pre-test–post-test comparisons of juror conceptions about forensic uses of DNA determined whether these multimedia facilitated juror comprehension. Analyses of responses to the expert evidence acknowledged the incidence of ‘CSI’ effects in which jurors have increased expectations of scientific evidence after viewing popular crime investigations on television. Since multimedia instruction for juries can apply to all forms of forensic evidence, we propose the use of structured instructional media for courts developing policies on uses of visual evidence.