Browsing by Author "Kurinec, Courtney A., 1988-"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
Item Are jurors persuaded by the "concreteness of truth"? : the impact of eyewitness concreteness, juror instructions, and visualization on juror decision making.(2016-07-11) Kurinec, Courtney A., 1988-; Weaver, Charles A.I investigated the impact of eyewitness use of linguistic concreteness on juror decision making. Mock jurors read a summary of an ambiguous criminal case that included a concrete or abstract version of an eyewitness’s testimony. When jurors received only these materials (Experiment 1), those who received the concrete testimony were more likely to render guilty verdicts and found the eyewitness more credible. However, concreteness had no effect when jurors received an additional document (Experiment 2), although juror instructions did induce skepticism of the eyewitness and the case in general. Neither concreteness nor juror visualization of the case directly influenced jurors’ decisions (Experiment 3), but those jurors who received the concrete testimony while visualizing perceived the eyewitness to be more accurate over time. Overall, these results do not suggest a consistent effect of concreteness on juror decision making. Future research should consider utilizing more robust methods to manipulate concreteness.Item Weakening the “illusion of memory knowledge” : a potential method for improving jurors' evaluation of eyewitness evidence.(2019-05-31) Kurinec, Courtney A., 1988-; Weaver, Charles A.Many efforts have been made to educate jurors about factors that influence the reliability of eyewitness memory. However, most of them fail to improve jurors’ sensitivity to the quality of a particular memory and instead only induce skepticism of all eyewitness evidence. One potential method for improving a prospective juror’s understanding of memory may be to ask them to explain a concept before providing expert information. By forcing jurors to acknowledge the limitations of their knowledge about memory, they may be more attentive to new, more accurate information. Over three experiments, I assessed whether explanations lead to a reassessment of memory knowledge (Experiment 1), explored whether reassessing one’s understanding leads to improved metacognition and learning (Experiment 2), and investigated the applicability of this task to the courtroom (Experiment 3). The findings from this project provide initial evidence that engaging in explanations may be a low-cost method for improving jurors’ evaluation of eyewitness evidence.