Abstract
Jury deliberation was added to a partial replication of Vidmar (1972). Simulated jurors chose verdicts and indicated their perceptions of the defendant and victim, both before and after deliberation in six-person juries. Vidmar's results were confirmed—significantly mote not guilty verdicts were found when subjects were required to choose between guilty of first-degree murder or not guilty than when the choice was between second-degree murder and not guilty. Social perceptions were consistent with the verdicts they chose. Deliberation enhanced the effect of type of decision alternative on distribution of the verdicts. Jurors were also significantly more lenient after deliberation. Implications for research with simulated jurors are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.