Abstract
Questions about how jurors understand and apply scientific evidence were addressed in a mock jury study in which 480 jury pool members watched a videotaped mock trial that included expert testimony about mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) evidence purportedly linking a defendant to a crime. Collectively, jurors showed moderately good comprehension of the mtDNA evidence, although some made definitional and inferential errors. Comprehension was better among jurors with higher educational attainment and more mathematics and science courses. Lower comprehension was associated with jurors' reservations about science and concerns about the contamination of mtDNA evidence. The results suggest that most jurors are capable of comprehending and employing scientific evidence presented during trial, although errors and doubts about the evidence should be anticipated.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 60-71 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Law and Human Behavior |
| Volume | 35 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Feb 1 2011 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
- Psychology(all)
- Psychiatry and Mental health
- Law
Cite this
}
Science in the jury box : Jurors' comprehension of mitochondrial DNA evidence. / Hans, Valerie P.; Kaye, David H.; Dann, B. Michael; Farley, Erin J.; Albertson, Stephanie.
In: Law and Human Behavior, Vol. 35, No. 1, 01.02.2011, p. 60-71.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Science in the jury box
T2 - Jurors' comprehension of mitochondrial DNA evidence
AU - Hans, Valerie P.
AU - Kaye, David H.
AU - Dann, B. Michael
AU - Farley, Erin J.
AU - Albertson, Stephanie
PY - 2011/2/1
Y1 - 2011/2/1
N2 - Questions about how jurors understand and apply scientific evidence were addressed in a mock jury study in which 480 jury pool members watched a videotaped mock trial that included expert testimony about mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) evidence purportedly linking a defendant to a crime. Collectively, jurors showed moderately good comprehension of the mtDNA evidence, although some made definitional and inferential errors. Comprehension was better among jurors with higher educational attainment and more mathematics and science courses. Lower comprehension was associated with jurors' reservations about science and concerns about the contamination of mtDNA evidence. The results suggest that most jurors are capable of comprehending and employing scientific evidence presented during trial, although errors and doubts about the evidence should be anticipated.
AB - Questions about how jurors understand and apply scientific evidence were addressed in a mock jury study in which 480 jury pool members watched a videotaped mock trial that included expert testimony about mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) evidence purportedly linking a defendant to a crime. Collectively, jurors showed moderately good comprehension of the mtDNA evidence, although some made definitional and inferential errors. Comprehension was better among jurors with higher educational attainment and more mathematics and science courses. Lower comprehension was associated with jurors' reservations about science and concerns about the contamination of mtDNA evidence. The results suggest that most jurors are capable of comprehending and employing scientific evidence presented during trial, although errors and doubts about the evidence should be anticipated.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79952361828&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79952361828&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10979-010-9222-8
DO - 10.1007/s10979-010-9222-8
M3 - Article
C2 - 20461543
AN - SCOPUS:79952361828
VL - 35
SP - 60
EP - 71
JO - Law and Human Behavior
JF - Law and Human Behavior
SN - 0147-7307
IS - 1
ER -