Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36264228›Full record

ArticleSocial cognitive and affective neuroscience2023

Social cognitive processes explain bias in juror decisions.

Jaime J Castrellon, Shabnam Hakimi, Jacob M Parelman, Lun Yin, Jonathan R Law, Jesse A G Skene, David A Ball, Artemis Malekpour, Donald H Beskind, Neil Vidmar and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social cognitive and affective neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 57% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Neural Support for Contributions of Utility and Narrative Processing of Evidence in Juror Decision Making.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jaime J CastrellonDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5834-7101
Shabnam HakimiCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, USA.
Jacob M ParelmanInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0344, USA.
Lun YinCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, USA.
Jonathan R LawDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, USA.
Jesse A G SkeneDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, USA.
David A BallMalekpour & Ball Consulting (JuryWatch, Inc.), Durham, North Carolina 27701, USA.
Artemis MalekpourMalekpour & Ball Consulting (JuryWatch, Inc.), Durham, North Carolina 27701, USA.
Donald H BeskindSchool of Law, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, USA.
Neil VidmarSchool of Law, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, USA.
John M PearsonDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, USA.
J H Pate SkeneInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0344, USA.
R McKell CarterInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0344, USA.
Duke University · USUniversity of Colorado Boulder · US

Funding

Nonparametric Bayes Methods for Big Data in NeuroscienceK01ES025442 · NIEHS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI PEARSON, JOHN · 2014 to 2018
$732k
NIEHS NIH HHS K01 ES025442
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Jury decisions are among the most consequential social decisions in which bias plays a notable role. While courts take measures to reduce the influence of non-evidentiary factors, jurors may still incorporate biases into their decisions. One common bias, crime-type bias, is the extent to which the perceived strength of a prosecutor's case depends on the severity of the crime. Moral judgment, affect and social cognition have been proposed as core processes underlying this and other biases. Behavioral evidence alone has been insufficient to distinguish these explanations. To identify the mechanism underlying crime-type bias, we collected functional magnetic resonance imaging patterns of brain activation from mock jurors reading criminal scenarios. Brain patterns from crime-type bias were most similar to those associated with social cognition (mentalizing and racial bias) but not affect or moral judgment. Our results support a central role for social cognition in juror decisions and suggest that crime-type bias and cultural bias may arise from similar mechanisms.

Indexed as

Decision MakingJudgmentBiasCognitionCriminal LawHumansMoralsdecision-makingfMRIlawsocial bias

Identifiers

PMID36264228
PMCPMC9949508
OpenAlexW4306901638

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.