Phyllis Laybourn

Collecting student feedback: a comparison of questionnaire and other methods

A study was conducted comparing the feedback received from students about teaching obtained using different instruments. Twelve first‐ and second‐year undergraduate modules were selected from seven different schools within a single university. Students studying each module were allocated to ‘questionnaire’ and ‘comparator’ groups. ‘Questionnaire’ students completed the standard end‐of‐module questionnaire, whilst ‘comparator’ groups evaluated the modules using ‘rapid feedback’, ‘H form’, focus group and reflective diary methods. The responses of 335 students to questionnaires were compared with those of 160 using the other methods; no results were obtained from the reflective diary students. Only a minority of the issues raised by students using the comparator methods were covered by the questionnaire, and the comparator methods showed different rankings of the issues in common. The key difference between questionnaire and comparator methods was the use of closed and open questions respectively, with comparator methods being more appropriate for formative evaluation.

Improving Groupworking Skills in Undergraduates Through Employer Involvement.

ABSTRACT Frequently undergraduate project work involves students working in groups. Such groupworking is often problematic owing to poor groupworking skills on the part of the students involved, yet ‘teamwork’ is one of those generic skills highly prized by employers. This study describes a pilot project to involve employers in the development of groupworking skills in undergraduate students, with the aims of increasing student awareness of group dynamics and processes and of promoting more effective groupworking. Students worked in small groups over a period of six to eight weeks on a problem associated with the module being studied. Employers observed students working in their groups and provided feedback to the students on their groupworking skills. The reactions (extremely positive) of students, staff and employers are presented. The procedures and methods used in the pilot are described and evaluated.

Own-age bias in video lineups: a comparison between children and adults

Abstract The present study investigated whether child (six–eight years of age) and adult witnesses (18–29 years of age) would exhibit an own-age bias when trying to identify targets from video lineups. One hundred and eighty-six participants viewed two filmed events that were identical, except one starred a child target and one a young adult. After a delay of two–three days each witness saw a lineup for the child and adult target. Children exhibited an own-age bias and were better at correctly identifying the own-age target from a target-present (TP) lineup and made more correct rejections for the own-age target-absent (TA) lineup. Adults however, showed a reversed own-age bias for the TP lineups as they made more correct identifications for the child target, but exhibited no bias for the TA lineups. The results suggest that differences in identification accuracy may be due to whether witness age and suspect age overlap.

Are consistent juror decisions related to fast and frugal decision making? Investigating the relationship between juror consistency, decision speed and cue utilisation.

The aim of this study was to establish whether more consistent/accurate juror decision making is related to faster decision-making processes which use fewer cues – that is, fast and frugal heuristic processes. A correlational design was implemented with the co-variables: consistency of verdict decisions (participant decisions compared to the actual court verdicts), decision speed, and cue utilisation (the number of cues used to make a final verdict decision). Sixty participants read information about six murder trials which were based on real cases and whose outcome verdicts were deemed to be correct by the Scottish legal institution. Three of the cases had been handed down ‘not guilty’ verdicts, and three had been handed down ‘guilty’ verdicts. Participants read opening statements and were then presented with a block of prosecution evidence, followed by a block of defence evidence. They were then asked to make a final verdict. All three co-variables were significantly related. Cue utilisation and speed were positively correlated, as would be expected. Consistency was negatively and significantly related to both speed and cue utilisation. Partial correlations highlighted that cue utilisation was the only variable to have a significant relationship with consistency, and that the relationship between speed and consistency was a by-product of how frugal the juror was. Findings support the concept of frugal decisional processes being optimal within a juror context. The more frugal a decision is, the more likely jurors are to be to be accurate/consistent.

Decision Science: A New Hope

Decision science is an area of enquiry that crosses many disciplines, from psychology to economics, each with their own perspective of decision-making. Traditionally, mathematicians have envisaged decision-making as a purely rational endeavor, whereas psychologists and behavioral economists have critiqued this narrative and suggested that cognitive short cuts are the real mechanisms behind how decisions are made. However, contemporary dual process theorists argue that two systems of the mind exist: system 1 (intuitive decision-making) and system 2 (rational decision-making). The current review will present a relatively new metaphor for decision-making: the unified threshold model. This model is a global approach to decision-making which allows both intuitive and rational decision-making processes to be explained in a more flexible manner than the dual process model. This review will introduce the reader to different types of threshold models (counter and diffusion), their assumptions, and their ability to explain decision-making behavior. Implications and future research will also be discussed. In summary, the aim of this review is to highlight that a rather than the unified threshold model of decision-making may give a more adequate explanation of decision-making data in comparison to previous models and theories.

Faith in thy threshold

The current study focussed on the decision-making processes of jurors. The study investigated how jurors make a decision, if they integrate information within their decision-making process and if cue utilisation thresholds promote confirmation bias. To do this, 108 participants listened to one of nine cases. These participants were asked to give a likelihood of guilt rating after each piece of evidence, to state what the last piece of information was that they needed to make a decision and to give a final verdict at the end of a trial. The results highlighted that threshold decision making was being utilised, that information integration may allow thresholds to be reached and that thresholds may promote confirmation bias to reduce cognitive dissonance. In conclusion, this suggests that jurors integrate information until they reach a leading verdict, then the evaluation of information is distorted to support the leading threshold. Implications relate to legal instructions for jurors.