Variations in Individual Juror Reasoning and Its Impact on Jury Decision Making

本研究通过两个实验考察了陪审员的推理和陪审团的决策。这里进行的每一项研究都旨在考察个人的推理能力以及这些能力如何影响群体决策。 这项研究建立在库恩1991年的发现基础上，即一般推理有两个层次，其中一个层次涉及满足-找到一个合理的故事并坚持下去，尽管证据不一致。 另一种类型的推理涉及系统地评估证据，以确定它在多大程度上适合其他故事，并选择具有最少不一致信息的故事。 实验研究陪审团的组成（在推理水平的分布和陪审团内部的审议前的裁决选择）如何影响陪审团作为一个整体的推理水平。 研究结果应该会导致对社会决策的更复杂的预测，其中包括对推理中个体差异的测量。

This research examines juror reasoning and jury decision-making via two experiments. Each of the studies undertaken here is designed to examine individuals' reasoning abilities and how those abilities affect group decision-making. The research builds on Kuhn's 1991 finding that there are two levels of general reasoning, one of which involves satisficing - finding a plausible story and sticking with it, despite non-conforming evidence. The other type of reasoning involves systematic evaluation of evidence for the extent to which it fits alternative stories, and selection of the one with the least discordant information. The experiments examine how jury composition (in terms of the distribution of reasoning levels and pre-deliberation verdict choices within the jury) affect the level of reasoning of the jury as a body. The results should lead to more sophisticated predictions of social decision-making that include measures of individual differences in reasoning.