part 3 – reaching a verdict
DESCRIPTION
Part 3 – Reaching a Verdict. Reaching a Verdict. Reaching a Verdict. This part consists of the following topics: Stages and influence on decision-making Hastie et al (93) Majority influence Asch (95) Minority influence Nemeth and Wachter (74). a) Stages and influence on decision-making. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Part 3 – Reaching a
VerdictReaching a Verdict
Reaching a Verdict• This part consists of the following topics:
a) Stages and influence on decision-making• Hastie et al (93)
b) Majority influence• Asch (95)
c) Minority influence• Nemeth and Wachter (74)
a) Stages and influence on decision-making
Reaching a Verdict
Background• At the end of a trial the jury return to the
courtroom to give their verdict
• In England the goal is to have a unanimous verdict from all 12 jurors but a majority of 10 out of 12 will sometimes suffice.
• How do they reach that verdict? .
Background cont…• The problem for researchers is that juries are swore to
secrecy about their deliberations, which take place behind closed doors, even after the trial, they are prohibited by law from discussing it
• This means that researchers have to rely on mock trials and reconstructions to investigate jury behaviour
• Some of the influences include:o size of the jury, o cognitive processes, o pre-trial publicity, o ethnicity, o gender, o individual differences, o leadership and o the social processes which influence decision-making such as majority and minority
influence
Hastie et al (93)Orientation Period
Relaxed & open discussion Set the agenda Raise questions and explore facts Different opinions arise
Open Confrontation
Fierce debate Focus on detail Explore different interpretations Pressure on the minority to
conform Support for the group decision is
establishedReconciliation Attempts to smooth over conflicts
Tension released through humour
DiscussionUsing the handout• Consider the following points: -
Firstly, on your ownThen with the person next to youThen as a small group
o What outside factors might affect a jury’s decision making?o Do you think confrontation is always necessary in order to come to a
verdict?o Is locking people in a room until they come to a unanimous decision a
good idea?o What is the problem of assuming these processes occur in decision
making in a jury?
EvaluationSplit your group in half……Half your group• Consider…
o Strong parallels with Tuckman’s theory of group formation
Other half consider evaluation points:-o Findings are from research that has not specifically studied jury
deliberation process
o Reductionism
o Social determinism/situational explanation
Share!!
b) Majority influenceReaching a Verdict
Asch (95)• This is the classic conformity experiment,
carried out on 123 male US students from 3 universities
• Groups of 7-9• 18 trials with 12 incorrect answers given by
majority at predetermined time
Results• Conformity with incorrect answer 36.8%
• Individual differenceso 25% never agreed with incorrecto Some went with majority the whole time
• Interview datao Conformists didn’t want to “spoil results” and underestimated
the frequency of their conformity
Variations• Varying group size
• Having single dissenter responding correctly
• Having single dissenter responding incorrectly
Evaluation• Consider…
o Use of lab experimentso Sampleo Data gathering techniqueso Situational explanationso Free willo Usefulness
c) Minority influenceReaching a Verdict
“We work in communities, schools and with young people to reconnect everyone with the food they eat, and to keep cooking skills
alive. We campaign for better food and good education in schools, and a global understanding of food”
So…. Agree or disagree with Jamie Oliver???
Background• Minority influence occurs when a minority rejects
the established norm of the majority of group members and gets the majority to move to the position of the minority.
• Minority influence is the result of INFORMATIONAL SOCIAL INFLUENCE- the desire to be right.
• TASK – Individually think of examples from History that demonstrate how powerful minorities can beo Compare your thoughts to the person next to youo All ideas as a group on the A3 paper
Real-life example of a minority influencing a majority was the suffragette movementA relatively small group of suffragettes argued strongly for the initially unpopular view that women should be allowed to vote. The hard work of the suffragettes, combined with the justice of their case, finally led the majority to accept their point of view
Influential in the 50’s with the Civil Rights Movement ~ Voting rights of the black community in AmericaPoverty of those in America - both black and white
Inspirational ability to rise above the brutal racial prejudices of his timeHe is being characterised as the most famous victim of the old Apartheid (racial segregation) regime, who, despite his 27 years of imprisonment, never sought vengeance against his oppressors but rather led an historic reconciliation process that transformed South Africa into a relatively peaceful, non-racial democracy.
Hitler alone ruled and governed the Nazi Party and that everyone else was below him and owed their position within the party to him
Controversial???!!
Gandhi was the leader of the Indian nationalist movement against British rule, and is widely considered the father of his country. His doctrine of non-violent protest to achieve political and social progress has been hugely influential.
Moscovici (69) - Aim• To examine…
o Impact of a consistent compared to an inconsistent minority
Procedure• All participants were female because
Moscovici thought that they would be more interested in a task that involved identifying colour!
• The participants were given eye tests to ensure they were not colour blind. They were then placed in a group of 6 (4 participants and 2 confederates).
• They were shown 36 slides which were clearly different shades of blue and asked to state the colour of each slide out loud.
• The use of filters varied the colour intensity of each slide.
• Participants were told that the experiment was about colour perception.
• In the first part of the experiment the confederates were consistent, they answered green for each of the slides.
• In the second part of the experiment, they were inconsistent, they answered green 24 times and blue 12 times.
• There were also control groups with no confederates.
Results• Control group: no confederates
o Only 0.25% of the control group’s answers were green, the rest were blue.
• Inconsistent minority condition:o 1.25% of the participants’ answers were green
• Consistent minority conditiono 8.42% of the participants’ answers were green.
Conclusion• Moscovici experiment suggests that:
o minorities can influence majorities. o However, it indicates that this influence is much more effective
when the minority are consistent in their response. o When the minority gave inconsistent answers they were largely
ignored by the majority.
• Why is consistency important? o According to Moscovici when the minority are consistent they
speak with a single voice and give the impression they are convinced they are right
o As a result they appear confident and thus are taken seriously by the majority.
o Therefore, minority influence is based on informational social influence- providing the majority with new ideas that cause them to re-examine their views.
Evaluation• Consider…
o Ethics o Sampleo Group sizeo Ecological validityo Usefulness
Revision Strategies• So….. No more Forensic!
• What strategies do we have???
• Rest of the session, develop some revision notes, methods to help