Off-campus UNL users: To download campus access dissertations, please use the following link to log into our proxy server with your NU ID and password. When you are done browsing please remember to return to this page and log out.
Non-UNL users: Please talk to your librarian about requesting this dissertation through interlibrary loan.
Juror comprehension in complex cases: An examination of juror notetaking and the insanity defense
Abstract
This investigation examined notetaking by jurors in an insanity trial. Notetaking by jurors has become a prominent issue in recent years as a result of the burgeoning number of complex trials. A principal argument against trial by jury in complex trials is that jurors are incompetent to handle the factual and legal complexities of the trial and are therefore inefficient and ineffective decisionmakers. This investigation examined the advantages and disadvantages of juror notetaking and the applicability of juror notetaking in insanity trials, which include a myriad of technical expert opinions, legally complex instructions, and the moral issue of criminal responsibility. The experimental design consisted of 80 six-person juries in four experimental conditions that varied by instructions type on dispositional alternatives. Jurors were instructed on the propriety of notetaking and then viewed a videotaped four-hour reenactment of a real trial and allowed to deliberate. Results showed that 67% of the jurors took notes averaging 5 pages each. There were no significant differences among the four versions and total number of pages taken. However, there was a significant difference in the number of pages taken during the prosecution's opening statement. Younger, highly educated, inexperienced jurors, and jurors who were students were found to be especially likely to take notes. Juror notetaking and use of notes during deliberations were significantly correlated with speaking time during deliberations. However, the content of the notes taken did not vary significantly among the four conditions. Most jurors found the notes helpful. There were no indications that jurors used their notes to coerce other jurors or that notes heightened any disagreement during the deliberations. Jurors used their notes primarily to clarify factual information and witness testimony. Significant differences were found among the four conditions for notes used to refresh memories, and notes on mental health professionals' conclusions and factual basis for, or logic of, their conclusions. Recommendations for the propriety of notetaking and future research are discussed.
Subject Area
Social psychology|Law
Recommended Citation
Wolfe, Daniel, "Juror comprehension in complex cases: An examination of juror notetaking and the insanity defense" (1990). ETD collection for University of Nebraska-Lincoln. AAI9118482.
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/dissertations/AAI9118482