Past research has investigated the cross-race effect in the context of eyewitnesses and jury decision-making. The main goal of my thesis was to gain further insight into participants’ knowledge of the cross-race effect and how this impacted participants’ discrimination of same- and cross-race identifications. One hundred fifty-nine undergraduate students from UOIT viewed a series of showup identification videos. I found that participants were better able to discriminate accurate from inaccurate same-race identifications than cross-race identifications. However, participants believed White witnesses more and found them more credible than South Asian witnesses. Further research should investigate other conditions that influence people’s abilities to discriminate accurate from inaccurate eyewitness identifications. / UOIT

Esta tesis ofrece una justificación para el uso de la pluralidad como una manera óptima de agregar información en las sociedades compuestas por individuos con intereses comunes pero con información diversa. El motivo de esta tesis es seguir una línea de investigación sobre la elección social que se remonta al matemático y filósofo político francés Jean-Antoine-Nicolas de Caritat, Marqués de Condorcet (1743-1794). En su Essai sur l'application de l'analyse à la probabilité des decisions rendues à la pluralité des voix (1785), Condorcet afirmó que se garantizaría la justicia social si las naciones adoptaran constituciones políticas que facilitaran el juicio correcto del grupo y argumentó que la votación por mayoría sería la herramienta constitucional más probable para alcanzar este objetivo.Siguiendo esta línea de investigación, la primera parte de esta tesis estudia las condiciones bajo las cuales la pluralidad proporciona a la sociedad el método más adecuado para llegar a decisiones de grupo. Aquí, como en el estudio de Condorcet, supondremos que los votantes actúan honradamente.El desarrollo natural de la teoría de votación, que ha introducido los temas de incentivos e interacción estratégica en la toma de decisiones de grupos, ha sido utilizado para cuestionar la suposición de votación honesta. Austen-Smith y Banks (1996) fueron los primeros en observar que la combinación de información privada e intereses comunes en el sistema propuesto por Condorcet podría crear incentivos para los votantes para actuar estratégicamente. Esta observación les condujo a plantear si la votación honesta sería compatible con el comportamiento de equilibrio de Nash en el juego inducido por la mayoría. La segunda parte de esta tesis expone esta problemática estudiando el comportamiento de los votantes en el juego inducido por la pluralidad.El interés en las instituciones del mundo real, para las cuales la votación es un elemento importante, ha hecho plantear desde hace tiempo la cuestión de si los votantes se comportan tal y como pronostican los modelos teóricos. Otra cuestión ha sido cómo tratar la complejidad del entorno estratégico. La segunda parte de esta tesis pide respuestas a estas preguntas. Puesto que la literatura sobre experimentos de votación parece proporcionar respuestas razonables a estas preguntas, la tercera parte de esta tesis utiliza experimentos de laboratorio para verificar las implicaciones de la segunda parte. / This thesis offers a justification for the use of plurality rule as an optimal way to aggregate information for societies composed of individuals with common interests but diverse information. The motivation of this thesis follows a line of research in social choice that dates back to the French mathematician and political philosopher Jean-Antoine-Nicolas de Caritat, Marquis de Condorcet (1743-1794). In his Essai sur l'application de l'analyse à la probabilité des decisions rendues à la pluralité des voix (1785), Condorcet posited that social justice would be secured if nations would adopt political constitutions that facilitate accurate group judgments, and argued that the majority rule would be the most likely constitutional tool to achieve this goal.Following this line of research, the first part of this thesis discusses the conditions under which plurality rule provides the society with the most likely method to reach accurate group judgments. In this part, as in Condorcet's work, it is assumed that voters act honestly. Natural developments in the theory of voting, that brought in the issues of incentives and strategic interaction in group decision making, were used to challenge the assumption of honest voting. Austen-Smith and Banks (1996) were the first to notice that the combination of private information and common interests in the framework proposed by Condorcet might create an incentive for voters to act strategically. This observation led them to ask the question of whether honest voting is compatible with the Nash equilibrium behavior in the game induced by majority rule. The second part of this thesis advances this problematic by studying voters' behavior in the game induced by plurality rule.The interest in real-world institutions, for which voting is an important element, raised for some time the question of whether voters behave as predicted by the theoretical models. Another question was of how to deal with the complexity of the strategic environment. The second part of this thesis calls for answers to these types of questions. Since the literature on voting experiments seems to provide reasonable answers to these questions, the third part of this thesis uses laboratory experiments to test the implications of the second part.

In this thesis I combine the social network analysis approach with the traditional experimental approach to study the phenomena of jury decision-making. I examine whether with each trial a social network is formed. The jurors, the two teams of lawyers, as well as the accused and the judge, all form a social network with cliques and leaders. This division of individuals into specific cliques, along with the lawyers' performance in court, is hypothesized to have a significant impact on the jury's verdict. <br /><br /> Thus, by specifically studying the lawyers' engagement and disengagement on the jurors during a trial and the impact this has on the verdict, as well as understanding the structure of the social network that the individual jurors create, I hope to shed light on some of the influences that are key in delivering the verdict. In addition, this pioneering study may lead to significant policy changes in the future.

Relationships between victim race, defendant race, participant characteristics, and general perceptions were assessed as they pertained to the final verdict. Photographs and brief date rape vignette were given to 339 participants. Participants were also asked to respond to follow-up questionnaire, Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Short Form scale, and Feeling Thermometer. Finally, participants were asked to render a final verdict, guilty or not guilty. Results indicated that participants’ perceptions relating towards responsibility significant predicted the likelihood of a guilty verdict being rendered. Additionally, results showed that there were significant differences across victim race and defendant race on verdict, such that overall the further the victim and defendant were apart on the color line, the more likely it would be for that case to receive a guilty verdict. Several participant variables also had significant effects on verdict, assignments of responsibility, and warmth towards specific racial groups. Results, future directions, and general implications are discussed.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Nevada, Reno, 2008. / "May, 2008." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 181-186). Online version available on the World Wide Web.

Thesis (M.J.S.)--University of Nevada, Reno, 2001. / "May 2001." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 58-62). Online version available on the World Wide Web.

Thesis (M.A.) - Carleton University, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 83-93). Also available in electronic format on the Internet.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of North Carolina at Wilmington, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves: 95-100)

Diss.--Bielefeld, 2000. / Bibliogr. p. 133-147.

abstract: Courthouse dogs (sometimes referred to as facility animals) are expertly trained canines which may be used to assist individuals with psychological, emotional, or physical difficulties in a myriad of courtroom situations. While these animals are increasingly used to assist young witness to court, the jury is still out on whether or not they are prejudicial to the defendant. No known research exists in this area, although research is necessary to determine the possibly prejudicial nature of these animals. Using a mock trial paradigm involving a child sexual abuse case, the current study employed a 2 (Witness type: victim vs. bystander) x 3 (Innovation type: courthouse dog vs. teddy bear vs. none) fully-crossed factorial design. It was hypothesized that witness type and innovation type would interact to differentially impact jurors' judgments about the trial, defendant, and child witness. In addition, it was posited that emotions, such as anger and disgust, would also affect judgments and decision-making. Results indicate that courthouse dogs and comfort toys did impact jurors' decision making in some ways. In addition, emotions and witness credibility predicted sentencing, verdict, and other trial judgments. / Dissertation/Thesis / M.S. Psychology 2013