Verdict spotting: Investigating the effects of juror bias, evidence anchors and verdict system in jurors
Open accessAbstract
The Scottish verdict of not proven represents a second acquittal verdict which is not legally defined. Existing research into the influence of the not proven verdict on jury decision making is modest. The main aim of the current study was therefore to investigate the influence of verdict systems (two vs three) on juror decision making. The effect of pre-trial bias and evidence anchors on juror judgements were also examined. One-hundred and twenty-eight mock jurors listened to two homicide vignettes and were asked to rate their belief of guilt of the accused and to give a verdict in both trials. The results suggest that pre-trial bias was a significant predictor of both verdict choice and belief of guilt, whereas evidence anchors were not a significant predictor of either. Finally, both guilty and not guilty verdicts were given with increased frequency in the two-verdict system when compared to the three-verdict system.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
These biases may undermine the justice and legal systems' goal of providing unbiased justice.
“These biases may undermine the justice and legal systems’ goal of providing unbiased justice (Curley et al., 2022b).”
From Biased and biasing: the hidden bias cascade and bias snowball effects (2025) · cites this paper as Curley et al., 2022b
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using <b>lme4</b>
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01 · Cited by 86,835 · see citing works
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/bf03193146 · Cited by 65,971 · see citing works
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650 · see citing works
Rational choice and the structure of the environment.
Simon, H. A. (1956) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0042769 · Cited by 5,919 · see citing works
How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats.
Gigerenzer, G., & Hoffrage, U. (1995) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.102.4.684 · Cited by 2,128 · see citing works
Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion
Simonson, I., & Tversky, A. (1992) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3172740 · Cited by 1,705 · see citing works
How to Make Cognitive Illusions Disappear: Beyond “Heuristics and Biases”
Gigerenzer, G. (1991) · European Review of Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/14792779143000033 · Cited by 1,153 · see citing works
The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic: Why the Adjustments Are Insufficient
Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. (2006) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01704.x · Cited by 920 · see citing works
Explaining the evidence: Tests of the Story Model for juror decision making.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1992) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.189 · Cited by 761 · see citing works
Evidence evaluation in complex decision making.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.2.242 · Cited by 659 · see citing works
The OHIO State Journal on Dispute Resolution
Nader, L. (2018) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315204826-10 · Cited by 354 · see citing works
The More You Ask For, the More You Get: Anchoring in Personal Injury Verdicts
Chapman, G. B., & Bornstein, B. H. (1996) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-0720(199612)10:6 · Cited by 305 · see citing works
Race in the Courtroom: Perceptions of Guilt and Dispositional Attributions
Sommers, S. R., & Ellsworth, P. C. (2000) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167200263005 · Cited by 283 · see citing works
Biased interpretation of evidence by mock jurors.
Carlson, K. A., & Russo, J. E. (2001) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied · doi:10.1037/1076-898x.7.2.91 · Cited by 225 · see citing works
A critical review of the jury simulation paradigm: The case of defendant characteristics.
Weiten, W., & Diamond, S. S. (1979) · Law and Human Behavior · doi:10.1007/bf01039149 · Cited by 174 · see citing works
The coherence effect: Blending cold and hot cognitions.
Simon, D., Stenstrom, D. M., & Read, S. J. (2015) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/pspa0000029 · Cited by 163 · see citing works
Reducing the effects of juror bias.
Kaplan, M. F., & Miller, L. E. (1978) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.36.12.1443 · Cited by 157 · see citing works
Viewing CSI and the Threshold of Guilt: Managing Truth and Justice in Reality and Fiction
Tyler, T. R. (2006) · The Yale Law Journal · doi:10.2307/20455645 · Cited by 140 · see citing works
Improving the Ability of Jurors to Comprehend and Apply Criminal Jury Instructions
Severance, L. J., & Loftus, E. F. (1982) · Law & Society Review · doi:10.2307/3053535 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
The ‘elasticity’ of criminal evidence: a moderator of investigator bias
Ask, K., Rebelius, A., & Granhag, P. A. (2008) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.1432 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Lecci, L., & Myers, B. (2008) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00378.x · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Juror reactions to DNA evidence: Errors and expectancies.
Schklar, J., & Diamond, S. S. (1999) · Law and Human Behavior · doi:10.1023/a:1022368801333 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
Williams, M. R., Demuth, S., & Holcomb, J. E. (2007) · Criminology · doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.2007.00095.x · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Determining damages: The psychology of jury awards.
Greene, E., & Bornstein, B. H. (2003) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/10464-000 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Understanding Pretrial Publicity: Predecisional Distortion of Evidence by Mock Jurors.
Hope, L., Memon, A., & McGeorge, P. (2004) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied · doi:10.1037/1076-898x.10.2.111 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
An integration theory analysis of jurors' presumptions of guilt or innocence.
Ostrom, T. M., Werner, C. M., & Saks, M. J. (1978) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.36.4.436 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
Judging by Heuristic: Cognitive Illusions in Judicial Decision Making
Guthrie, C., Rachlinski, J. J., & Wistrich, A. J. (2002) · Scholarship @ Cornell Law (Cornell University) · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Willmott, D., Boduszek, D., Debowska, A., & Woodfield, R. (2018) · Journal of Criminal Justice · doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2018.03.004 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
TE-AFLP: combining rapidity and robustness in DNA fingerprinting
van der Wurff, A. W. G. (2000) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/28.24.e105 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Europe's New Jury Systems: The Cases of Spain and Russia
Thaman, S. C. (1999) · Law and Contemporary Problems · doi:10.2307/1192258 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Maeder, E. M., Yamamoto, S., & Saliba, P. (2015) · Psychology, Crime & Law · doi:10.1080/1068316x.2014.915325 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Do juries meet our expectations?
Arkes, H. R., & Mellers, B. A. (2002) · Law and Human Behavior · doi:10.1023/a:1020929517312 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Guilty, not guilty, or …? multiple options in jury verdict choices
Smithson, M. J., Deady, S., & Gracik, L. (2007) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.572 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Secondary Confessions, Expert Testimony, and Unreliable Testimony
Neuschatz, J. S., Wilkinson, M., Goodsell, C. A., Wetmore, S. A., Quinlivan, D. S., & Jones, N. J. (2012) · Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology · doi:10.1007/s11896-012-9102-x · Cited by 46 · see citing works
de la Fuente, L., Fuente, E. I. D. L., & García, J. G. (2003) · Psychology Crime and Law · doi:10.1080/1068316031000116283 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
When crimes are joined at trial.
Greene, E., & Loftus, E. F. (1985) · Law and Human Behavior · doi:10.1007/bf01067051 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Truth or proof?: The criminal verdict
Jackson, B. S. (1998) · International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique · doi:10.1007/bf01110409 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
The Scottish Criminal Jury: A Very Peculiar Institution
Duff, P. R. (1999) · Law and Contemporary Problems · doi:10.2307/1192256 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Smith, L. L., & Bull, R. (2011) · Psychology Crime and Law · doi:10.1080/1068316x.2011.561800 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Scotland's Bastard Verdict: Intermediacy and the Unique Three-Verdict System
Barbato, J. M. (2005) · Indiana international & comparative law review · doi:10.18060/17848 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Scottish jury research : findings from a large-scale mock jury study
Ormston, R., Chalmers, J., Leverick, F., Munro, V. E., & Murray, L. (2019) · ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) · doi:10.82444/warw.33795991 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Muehlberger, C. W. (1962) · The Journal of Criminal Law Criminology and Police Science · doi:10.2307/1141084 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Lecci, L. B., & Myers, B. (2009) · Psychology Crime and Law · doi:10.1080/10683160802477757 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Allison, M., Jung, S. Y., Sweeney, L., & Culhane, S. E. (2013) · Psychiatry Psychology and Law · doi:10.1080/13218719.2013.803275 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Hope, L., Greene, E., Memon, A., Gavisk, M., & Houston, K. A. (2007) · Law and Human Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10979-007-9106-8 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
The bastard verdict and its influence on jurors
Curley, L. J., MacLean, R., Murray, J., Laybourn, P., & Brown, D. (2018) · Medicine Science and the Law · doi:10.1177/0025802418811740 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Self-citationJuror Decisions and the Determination of Guilt in Capital Punishment Cases: A Bayesian Perspective
Marshall, C. R., & Wise, J. A. (1975) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_15 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Predicting verdicts using pre‐trial attitudes and standard of proof
Lundrigan, S., Dhami, M. K., & Mueller‐Johnson, K. (2013) · Legal and Criminological Psychology · doi:10.1111/lcrp.12043 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Estrada-Reynolds, V. C., Gray, J. M., & Nunez, N. L. (2015) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.3155 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Curley, L. J., Murray, J., MacLean, R., Laybourn, P., & Brown, D. (2018) · Medicine Science and the Law · doi:10.1177/0025802418791062 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Self-citationEstimating juror accuracy, juror ability, and the relationship between them.
Park, K. (2010) · Law and Human Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10979-010-9240-6 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Informing reform: the views of legal professionals on the unique aspects of Scottish Law.
Curley, L. J., Munro, J., Frumkin, L. A., & Turner, J. (2021) · Medicine, Science and the Law · doi:10.1177/0025802421992913 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Self-citationNudging the Justice System Toward Better Decisions
Greene, E., & Bornstein, B. H. (2013) · bepress Legal Repository · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Is jury bias preventing justice for rape victims?
Willmott, D. (2016) · Figshare · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Identifying juror bias: Using the Pretrial Juror Attitude Questionnaire for more effective voir dire
Mobley, S. J. (2008) · UTA ResearchCommons (University of Texas Arlington) · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
2 of the 57 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Criminal Proceedings in Scotland. (2011). Statistical bulletin: Crime and justice series: Criminal proceedings in Scotland, 2010–11. https://www.gov.scot/publications/statistical-bulletin-crime-justice-series-criminal-proceedings-scotland-2010-11/pages/5/
- Gliem, J. A., Gliem, R. R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales [Paper presentation]. Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, The Ohio State University. 1–7. http://hdl.handle.net/1805/344
- Posey, A. J., & Wrightsman, L. S. (2005). Trial consulting. In American Psychology-Law Society series (pp. 157– 172). Oxford University Press.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Curley, L. J., Munro, J., & Dror, I. E. (2022) · Medicine, Science and the Law · doi:10.1177/00258024221080655 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Self-citationBiased and biasing: the hidden bias cascade and bias snowball effects
Dror, I. E. (2025) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs15040490 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Curley, L. J., & Neuhaus, T. (2024) · Journal of Criminal Psychology · doi:10.1108/jcp-12-2023-0079 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Self-citationStevens, K. L., Austin, A., Wheeler, D., & Malec, T. (2021) · Journal of Sexual Aggression · doi:10.1080/13552600.2021.1973127 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
The radiologist–AI workflow and the risk of medical malpractice claims
Bernstein, M. H., Sheppard, B., Bruno, M. A., Lay, P. S., & Baird, G. L. (2026) · Nature Health · doi:10.1038/s44360-026-00085-2 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Proven and not proven: a potential alternative to the current Scottish verdict system.
Curley, L. J., Munro, J., Turner, J., Frumkin, L. A., Jackson, E., & Lages, M. (2022) · Behavioral Sciences & the Law · doi:10.1002/bsl.2568 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Self-citationRape Myths and Verdict Systems: What Is Influencing Conviction Rates in Rape Trials in Scotland?
Curley, L. J., Lages, M., Sime, P. J., & Munro, J. (2024) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs14070619 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Self-citationCurley, L. J., Widanaralalage, B. K., Willmott, D., & Ermenkova, J. (2026) · Behavioral Sciences & the Law · doi:10.1002/bsl.70044 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Self-citationThe effect of verdict system on juror decisions: a quantitative meta-analysis
Jackson, E., Curley, L. J., Leverick, F., & Lages, M. (2024) · Psychiatry Psychology and Law · doi:10.1080/13218719.2023.2272912 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Self-citationAn Interdisciplinary Re-Perspectivation of the Study of Heuristics, Biases, and Nudges
Curley, L. J., & Neuhaus, T. (2023) · NETSOL New Trends in Social and Liberal Sciences · doi:10.24819/netsol2023.9
Self-citationThe effects of contextual bias on face recognition decisions
Curley, L. J., Breese, E., Munro, J., Havard, C., Skelton, F. C., & Pike, G. (2025) · Journal of Forensic Sciences · doi:10.1111/1556-4029.70177
Self-citationPosner v. Tullock: Diverging Paths in the Economic Analysis of the Law
Haywood, O. M. (2025) · Review of the history of economic thought and methodology. · doi:10.16995/rhetm.23071
Hughes, V., Llamas, C., & Kettig, T. (2026) · International Journal of Speech Language and the Law · doi:10.3138/ijsll-2025-0022
Sultan, S., Azeem, H. M., & Jathol, A. A. (2026) · The regional tribune. · doi:10.55737/trt/v-iv.309
- Authors
- Curley, L. J., Murray, J., MacLean, R., Munro, J., Lages, M., Frumkin, L. A., Laybourn, P., & Brown, D.
- Affiliations
- The Open University (GB)
- Edinburgh Napier University (GB)
- University of Glasgow (GB)
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Curley, Lee J.
- Venue
- Psychiatry, Psychology and Law
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2021-05-04
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 323-344
- ISSN
- 1321-8719 (ISSN-L)
- 1934-1687
- PMC
- PMC9310652
- OpenAlex
- W3137893550
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 57
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 13.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Psychiatry Psychology and Law (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Open Research Online - ORO (The Open University) (acceptedVersion)
- Edinburgh Napier Research Repository (Edinburgh Napier University) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- Research Output (Edinburgh Napier University) (submittedVersion)
- 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
- juror bias, jury decision-making, mock jurors
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
