Diverging Decisions? A Comparison of Jury Verdict Procedures.

Kayla A Burd, Valerie P Hans, Hannah J Phalen, Stephanie Madon, Max Guyll, Krystia Reed

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Kayla A BurdDepartment of Psychology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0107-8788

Valerie P HansCornell Law School, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4470-5478

Hannah J PhalenDepartment of Psychology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3165-3373

Stephanie MadonSchool of Interdisciplinary Forensics, Arizona State University, Glendale, AZ 85306, USA.

Max GuyllSchool of Interdisciplinary Forensics, Arizona State University, Glendale, AZ 85306, USA.

Krystia ReedDepartment of Psychology, University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, TX 79968, USA.

Funding

American Psychology-Law Society N/ASociety for Personality and Social Psychology N/A

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Courts have the capacity to structure juries' decision making through the use of general verdicts with answers to written questions, special verdicts, and, in some countries, the requirement that juries provide reasons for their verdicts. Little empirical research has explored the impact of special verdicts or a reasoning requirement on juror decision making in comparison to other verdict procedures. In Experiment 1, mock jurors (

Indexed as

civil lawjuror decision makingraceverdict procedures

Identifiers

PMID41464009

DOI10.3390/bs15121666

PMCPMC12729272

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

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.