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推理和陪审团决策。这里进行的每一项研究都旨在检查个人的推理能力，以及这些能力如何影响群体决策。这项研究建立在库恩1991年发现的一般推理的两个层面上，其中一个层面涉及满足感--找到一个可信的故事并坚持下去，尽管证据不一致。另一种类型的推理涉及系统地评估证据在多大程度上适合不同的故事，并选择不一致信息最少的一个。这些实验考察了陪审团的组成(就陪审团内部推理水平的分布和审议前裁决的选择而言)如何影响陪审团作为一个整体的推理水平。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衡量。

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.