Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-swr86 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T10:18:24.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth and Maturation in Psychology and Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

Shari Seidman Diamond
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The growth of research in psychology and law during the last decade is easy to document. The Annual Review of Psychology has included two chapters on the subject, the first in 1976 and the second in 1982. In 1981 the American Psychological Association approved a new Division of Psychology and Law and selected that theme for the 1982 Master Lecture series at its convention. New journals (e.g., Law and Human Behavior) and collections of articles (e.g., Sales, 1981; Kerr and Bray, 1982; Konečni and Ebbeson, 1982) have reported on the burgeoning literature.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 17 , Issue 1: Special Issue: Psychology and Law , 1982 , pp. 11 - 20
Copyright
Copyright © 1982 The Law and Society Association.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

BAUMEISTER, Roy F., and John M., DARLEY (1982) “Reducing the Biasing Effect of Perpetrator Attractiveness in Jury Simulation,” 8 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 286.Google Scholar
BERMANT, Gordon, McGUIRE, Mary, McKINLEY, William, and Chris, SALO (1974) “The Logic of Simulation in Jury Research,” 1 Criminal Justice and Behavior 224.Google Scholar
BOWERS, William J. and Glenn L., PIERCE (1975) “The Elusion of Deterrence in Isaac Ehrlich's Research on Capital Punishment,” 85 Yale Law Journal 187.Google Scholar
BRAY, Robert M. (1976) “The Mock Trial: Problems and Prospects for Jury Research.” Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
BRAY, Robert M. and Norbert L., KERR (1979) “Use of the Simulation Method in the Study of Jury Behavior: Some Methodological Considerations,” 3 Law and Human Behavior 107.Google Scholar
BRIDGEMAN, Diane and David, MARLOWE (1979) “Jury Decision Making: An Empirical Study Based on Actual Felony Trials,” 64 Journal of Applied Psychology 91.Google Scholar
CHARROW, Robert P. and Vita R., CHARROW, (1979) “Making Legal Language Understandable: A Psycholinguistic Study of Jury Instructions,” 79 Columbia Law Review 1306.Google Scholar
COWAN, Claudia, William, THOMPSON, and Phoebe, ELLSWORTH (in press) The Effects of Death Qualification on Jurors' Predisposition to Convict and on the Quality of Deliberation, Law and Human Behavior.Google Scholar
DIAMOND, Shari S. (1979) “Simulation: Does the Microscope Lens Distort?” 3 Law and Human Behavior 1.Google Scholar
DIAMOND, Shari S. and Hans, ZEISEL (1974) “A Courtroom Experiment on Juror Selection and Decision Making,” 1 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 276.Google Scholar
EHRLICH, Isaac (1975) “The Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment: A Question of Life and Death,” 65 American Economic Review 397.Google Scholar
ENNIS, Phillip H. (1967) Criminal Victimization in the United States (Field Survey II. A report of a National Survey. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice). Criminal Victimization in the United States (Field Survey II. A report of a National Survey. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice): U.S. Government Printing Office: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
GERBASI, Kathleen C., Miron, ZUCKERMAN, and Harry T., REIS (1977) “Justice Needs a New Blindfold: A Review of Mock Jury Research,” 84 Psychological Bulletin 323.Google Scholar
GORDON, Robert I. and Paul D., JACOBS (1969) “Forensic Psychology: Perception of Guilt and Income,” 28 Perceptual and Motor Skills 143.Google Scholar
HINDELANG, Michael and Michael, GOTTFREDSON (1976) “The Victim's Decision Not to Invoke the Criminal Justice Process,” in McDonald, W. (ed.), Criminal Justice and the Victim. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
IZZETT, Richard and Walter, LEGINSKI (1974) “Group Discussion and the Influence of Defendant Characteristics in a Simulated Jury Setting,” 93 Journal of Social Psychology 271.Google Scholar
KAPLAN, Martin and Gwen, KEMMERICK (1974) “Juror Judgment as an Information Integration: Combining Evidential and Nonevidential Information,” 30 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 493.Google Scholar
KERR, Norbert and Robert, BRAY (eds.) (1982) The Psychology of the Courtroom. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
KONE$nCNI, Vladmir J. and Ebbe B., EBBESEN (eds.) (1982) The Criminal Justice System: A Social Psychological Analysis. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
KONE$nCNI, Vladmir J. (1979) “External Validity of Research in Legal Psychology,” 3 Law and Human Behavior 39.Google Scholar
LANDY, David and Elliot, ARONSON (1969) “The Influence of the Character of the Criminal and his Victim on the Decisions of Simulated Jurors,” 5 Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 141.Google Scholar
LEMPERT, Richard O. (1977) “Modeling Relevance,” 75 Michigan Law Review 1021.Google Scholar
LEMPERT, Richard O. (1981) “Civil Juries and Complex Cases: Let's Not Rush to Judgment,” 80 Michigan Law Review 68.Google Scholar
McCABE, Sarah and Robert, PURVES (1974) The Shadow Jury at Work. Oxford University Penal Research Unit: Blackwell.Google Scholar
MILLS, Carol J. and Wayne E., BOHANNON (1980) “Character Structure and Jury Behavior: Conceptual and Applied Implications, 38 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 662.Google Scholar
MONAHAN, John and Elizabeth, LOFTUS (1982) “The Psychology of Law,” 33 Annual Review of Psychology 441.Google Scholar
PENROD, Steven (1979) Study of Attorney and ‘Scientific’ Jury Selection Models. Doctoral Dissertation, Harvard University.Google Scholar
RICHEY, Marjorie H. and James J., FICHTER (1969) “Sex Differences in Moralism and Punitiveness,” 16 Psychonomic Science 185.Google Scholar
SAKS, Michael (1981) Small Group Decision Making and Complex Information Tasks. Federal Judicial Center.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAKS, Michael (1976) “The Limits of Scientific Jury Selection,” 17 Jurimetrics Journal 3.Google Scholar
SAKS, Michael (1977) Jury Verdicts, Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.Google Scholar
SALES, Bruce D. (ed.) (1982) The Trial Process. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
SIMON, Rita J. (1967) The Jury and the Defense of Insanity. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
TAPP, June L. (1980) “Psychological and Policy Perspectives on the Law: Reflections on a Decade,” 36 Journal of Social Issues 165.Google Scholar
THOMPSON, William, Claudia, COWAN, Phoebe, ELLSWORTH, and Joan, HARRINGTON (in press) Death Penalty Attitudes and Conviction Proneness: The Translation of Attitudes into Verdicts, Law and Human Behavior.Google Scholar
VIDMAR, Neil (1979) “The Other Issues in Jury Simulation Research: A Commentary with Particular Reference to Defendant Character Studies,” 3 Law and Human Behavior 95.Google Scholar
WEITEN, Wayne (1980) “The Attraction-Leniency Effect in Jury Research: An Examination of External Validity, 10 Journal of Applied Social Psychology 340.Google Scholar
WEITEN, Wayne and Shari S., DIAMOND (1979) “A Critical Review of the Jury Simulation Paradigm: The Case of Defendant Characteristics,” 3 Law and Human Behavior 71.Google Scholar
WIGMORE, John H. (1937) The Science of Judicial Proof. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
WILSON, David W. and Donnerstein, Edward (1977) “Guilty or Not Guilty? A Look at the ‘Simulated’ Jury Paradigm,” 7 Journal of Applied Social Psychology 175.Google Scholar
ZEISEL, Hans and Shari S., DIAMOND (1978) “The Effect of Peremptory Challenges on Jury and Verdict: An Experiment in a Federal District Court,” 30 Stanford Law Review 491.Google Scholar

Cases Cited

Ballew v. Georgia, 435 U.S. 223, 1978.Google Scholar
Burch v. Louisiana, 47 L.W. 4393, 1979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar