Abstract
Amid growing psychological controversy and legal interest surrounding the uses of PCL-R and biological evidence in the legal system, this mock jury study assessed the effects of PCL-R and biological evidence on outcomes in an insanity defense case. A sample of 428 undergraduates read a trial transcript of an insanity defense murder case. Three variables of interest were manipulated: rebuttal illness (no mental illness, personality disorder, or psychopathy), evidentiary basis (biological or psychological), and evidentiary strength (moderately strong or moderately weak). Consistent with the hypotheses, biological evidence was more persuasive than psychological evidence, and the rebuttal was slightly more successful when the prosecution labeled the defendant as a "psychopath" than when they described him simply as "not mentally ill."
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 411-425 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Journal | Behavioral Sciences and the Law |
| Volume | 28 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - May 2010 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Medicine(all)
- Psychiatry and Mental health
- Clinical Psychology
- Law
Cite this
Expert testimony and the effects of a biological approach, psychopathy, and juror attitudes in cases of insanity. / Rendell, Jariel A.; Huss, Matthew T.; Jensen, Maren L.
In: Behavioral Sciences and the Law, Vol. 28, No. 3, 05.2010, p. 411-425.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Expert testimony and the effects of a biological approach, psychopathy, and juror attitudes in cases of insanity
AU - Rendell, Jariel A.
AU - Huss, Matthew T.
AU - Jensen, Maren L.
PY - 2010/5
Y1 - 2010/5
N2 - Amid growing psychological controversy and legal interest surrounding the uses of PCL-R and biological evidence in the legal system, this mock jury study assessed the effects of PCL-R and biological evidence on outcomes in an insanity defense case. A sample of 428 undergraduates read a trial transcript of an insanity defense murder case. Three variables of interest were manipulated: rebuttal illness (no mental illness, personality disorder, or psychopathy), evidentiary basis (biological or psychological), and evidentiary strength (moderately strong or moderately weak). Consistent with the hypotheses, biological evidence was more persuasive than psychological evidence, and the rebuttal was slightly more successful when the prosecution labeled the defendant as a "psychopath" than when they described him simply as "not mentally ill."
AB - Amid growing psychological controversy and legal interest surrounding the uses of PCL-R and biological evidence in the legal system, this mock jury study assessed the effects of PCL-R and biological evidence on outcomes in an insanity defense case. A sample of 428 undergraduates read a trial transcript of an insanity defense murder case. Three variables of interest were manipulated: rebuttal illness (no mental illness, personality disorder, or psychopathy), evidentiary basis (biological or psychological), and evidentiary strength (moderately strong or moderately weak). Consistent with the hypotheses, biological evidence was more persuasive than psychological evidence, and the rebuttal was slightly more successful when the prosecution labeled the defendant as a "psychopath" than when they described him simply as "not mentally ill."
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77955669374&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77955669374&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/bsl.913
DO - 10.1002/bsl.913
M3 - Article
C2 - 20014145
AN - SCOPUS:77955669374
VL - 28
SP - 411
EP - 425
JO - Behavioral Sciences and the Law
JF - Behavioral Sciences and the Law
SN - 0735-3936
IS - 3
ER -