what the limitations in be a juror

Introduction Eyewitness testimony research has informed the federal government's guidelines for competent use of eyewitness evidence in criminal matters (Wells, Malpass, Lindsay, Fisher, Turtle, & Fulgro, 2000). Such research has led the New Jersey Supreme Court to mandate that judges tell jurors that eyewitness memory can be unreliable (Weiser, 2012). An important question is how juries actually respond to evidence and to cautions about the strength of the evidence. Not surprisingly, the question is complex because of the wide variety of factors that can affect juries (Devine, Krouse, Cavanaugh, & Besera, 2016; Wells & Olson, 2003). However, psychological scientists have identified some strategies that might help jurors reach optimal decisions (Rodriguez & Berry, 2016). This study regarding the effect of eyewitness testimony can be used to generate a discussion regarding the influence on juries of such testimony. The researchers hypothesized that people are more likely to convict someone if there is an eyewitness testimony, regardless of whether the eyewitness testimony was likely to be reliable or not. The computer randomly assigns each participant to one of three different scenarios, in which the participant learns details of a crime. In the first scenario, the defendant provides testimony and argues he is not guilty. The second scenario is similar but also includes a statement that a witness saw the defendant commit the crime. In the third and final scenario, an attorney indicates that the witness was not wearing his glasses, thus his testimony may have been false. In the initial research, Loftus (1979) found that participants, acting in the role of juror would be more likely to convict someone on the basis of eyewitness testimony, even if that testimony were questioned. Design Participants are in one of three treatment conditions (a) no eyewitness, (b) unrefuted eyewitness, and (c) discredited eyewitness (this was the IV with three levels - between subjects. Participants in this study rate their belief about the defendant's guilt (the DV). The rating scale ranges from a 1 (definitely not guilty) to a 7 (definitely guilty). Materials Here are the scenarios that you read (between subjects): Everyone read - Description of the Crime: On Friday, May 12, 2020, the owner of a small grocery store was confronted by a man who demanded money from the cash register. The owner immediately handed $1 10 to the robber, who took the money and started walking away. Suddenly, and for no apparent reason, the robber turned and fired two shots at the owner and his five-year-old granddaughter, who was standing behind the counter. Both victims died instantly. Two hours later, the police arrested a suspect and charged him with robbery and murder. Unrefuted Eyewitness participants then read: Unrefuted eyewitness - Summary of Arguments Presented by the Prosecution The robber was seen running into the same apartment house in which the defendant lived. $123 was found in the defendant's room. Traces of ammonia used to clean the floor of the store were found on the defendant's shoes. Chemical tests to determine whether a person has gun powder on his hands from firing a gun indicated that there was a slight possibility that the defendant had fired a gun during the same day. A clerk who was in the store during the robbery testified that he saw the defendant shoot the two victims. Unrefuted eyewitness - Summary of Arguments Presented by the Defense The defendant testified that he did not commit the crime. The defendant testified that the money found in the room was his savings from two months. The defendant testified that the ammonia traces on his shoes could have been obtained at a different place because he worked as a delivery man. The defendant testified that he had never fired a gun in his life. Discredited Eyewitness participants read description of the crime (above) and then: Discredited eyewitness - Summary of Arguments Presented by the Prosecution The robber was seen running into the same apartment house in which the defendant lived. $123 was found in the defendant's room. Traces of ammonia used to clean the floor of the store were found on the defendant's shoes. Chemical tests to determine whether a person has gun powder on his hands from firing a gun indicated that there was a slight possibility that the defendant had fired a gun during the same day. A clerk who was in t store during the robbery testified that he saw the defendant shoot the two victims. Discredited eyewitness - Summary of Arguments Presented by the Defense The defendant testified that he did not commit the crime. The defendant testified that the money found in the room was his savings from two months. The defendant testified that the ammonia traces on his shoes could have been obtained at a different place because he worked as a delivery man. The defendant testified that he had never fired a gun in his life. The clerk who witnessed the crime had not been wearing his glasses during the robbery, and since he has vision poorer than 20/400 (legally blind), he could not possibly have seen the face of the robber from where he stood. No Eyewitness participants read description of the crime (above) and then: No eyewitness - Summary of s Presented by the Prosecution The robber was seen running into the same apartment house in which the defendant lived. . $123 was found in the defendant's room. Traces of ammonia used to clean the floor of the store were found on the defendant's shoes. Chemical tests to determine whether a person has gun powder on his hands from firing a gun indicated that there was a slight possibility that the defendant had fired a gun during the same day. No eyewitness - Summary of Arguments Presented by the Defense The defendant testified that he did not commit the crime. The defendant testified that the money found in the room was his savings from two months. The defendant testified that the ammonia traces on his shoes could have been obtained at a different place because he worked as a delivery man. The defendant testified that he had never fired a gun in his life