The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Explaining the evidence: Tests of the Story Model for juror decision making.
Abstract
This research investigates the Story Model, Pennington and Hastie's (1986, 1988) explanationbased theory of decision making for juror decisions. In Experiment 1, varying the ease with which stories could be constructed affected verdict judgments and the impact of credibility evidence. Memory for evidence in all conditions was equivalent, implying that the story structure was a mediator of decisions and of the impact of credibility evidence. In Experiments 2 and 3, Ss evaluated the evidence in 3 ways. When Ss made a global judgment at the end of the case, their judgment processes followed the prescriptions of the Story Model, not of Bayesian or linear updating models. When Ss made item-by-item judgments after each evidence block, linear anchor and adjust models described their judgments. In conditions in which story construction strategies were more likely to be used, story completeness had greater effects on decisions.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The story model of jury decision-making (Pennington and Hastie 1992), underpinned by a wealth of empirical support (Pennington and Hastie 1988;Willmott et al. 2018), suggests that jurors are actively engaged in a narrative construction of information surrounding a case.”
From Do Pre-Trial Juror Attitudes Predict Rape Trial Verdict Decisions? Investigating the Role of Rape Myth Beliefs, Contemporary Sexist Attitudes and Sexual Victimization Experiences on Juror Decision-Making (2025) · cites this paper as Pennington and Hastie 1992
In the citing paper
“Taken together, findings offer theoretical support for Pennington and Hastie's (1992) story model of juror decision-making”
From Do Pre-Trial Juror Attitudes Predict Rape Trial Verdict Decisions? Investigating the Role of Rape Myth Beliefs, Contemporary Sexist Attitudes and Sexual Victimization Experiences on Juror Decision-Making (2025) · cites this paper as Pennington and Hastie's (1992)
In the citing paper
“For this reason, the policymaking process and the jury-based law system are often characterized not only by debates over facts but also by the narrative interpretations of those facts (Mukand & Rodrik, 2018; Pennington & Hastie, 1992).”
From Stories in Action. (2022) · cites this paper as Pennington & Hastie, 1992
Citations
Cites
The Handbook of Social Psychology
Gravatt, A. E., Lindzey, G. E., & Aronson, F. (1969) · The Family Coordinator · doi:10.2307/582242 · Cited by 12,518
The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model.
Kintsch, W. (1988) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.95.2.163 · Cited by 4,618
SCRIPTS, PLANS, GOALS, AND UNDERSTANDING
Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1988) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-1-4832-1446-7.50019-4 · Cited by 4,544
The processes of causal attribution.
Kelley, H. H. (1973) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/h0034225 · Cited by 4,025 · cited 1×
“Causal calculi in the form of algebraic computations (e.g., Anderson, 1974; Einhorn & Hogarth, 1985) or inductive rules (e.g., Kelley, 1973 ) describe how stimulus information is translated into explanations, predictions, and assignments of responsibility.”
BackgroundMiller, G. A., & Cantor, N. E. (1982) · Social Cognition · doi:10.1521/soco.1982.1.1.83 · Cited by 2,862
Attribution theory and research
Kelley, H. H., & Michela, J. L. (1980) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.31.020180.002325 · Cited by 2,651
The Representation of Meaning in Memory
Anderson, J. R., & Kintsch, W. (1975) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421786 · Cited by 2,061
New directions in attribution research
Harvey, J. H., Ickes, W. J., & Kidd, R. F. (1976) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,994
Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model
Hogarth, R. M., & Einhorn, H. J. (1992) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(92)90002-j · Cited by 1,646
Structure of Decision: The Cognitive Maps of Political Elites
(2015) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9781400871957 · Cited by 1,508
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Barsalou, L. W. (1999) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x99002149 · Cited by 6,887
Misinformation and Its Correction: Continued Influence and Successful Debiasing
Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., Seifert, C. M., Schwarz, N., & Cook, J. (2012) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100612451018 · Cited by 2,920
Uniting the Tribes of Fluency to Form a Metacognitive Nation
Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2009) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868309341564 · Cited by 1,821
Shafir, E. (1993) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(93)90034-s · Cited by 1,453
Narrative Processing: Building Consumer Connections to Brands
Escalas, J. E. (2004) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp1401&2_19 · Cited by 1,398
Metadata
- Authors
- Pennington, N., & Hastie, R.
- Affiliations
- University of Colorado Boulder (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Published
- 1992-02
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 189-206
- ISSN
- 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1315
- OpenAlex
- W1984737313
- Cited by
- 761
- References
- 51
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 36 · 2012: 29
- FWCI
- 103.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Jury Decision Making Processes
- Social Sciences › Law › Legal processes and jurisprudence
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Keywords
- story model, jury decision-making, narrative construction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
