Improving civil jury decision-making: Evidentiary and procedural issues

The civil jury has been under attack in recent years for being unreliable and incompetent. Considering the myriad causes for poor civil juror decision-making, the current investigation explores both procedural and evidentiary issues that impact juror's decisions. Specifically, the first phase of this dissertation examines how jurors (mis)use evidence pertaining to the litigants when determining liability and awarding damages. After investigating how jurors utilize evidence, the focus shifts to exploring the utility of procedural reforms designed to improve decision-making (specifically revising the instructions on the laws in the case and bifurcating the damage phases of the trial). Using the results from the first two phases of the research, the final study involves manipulating pieces of evidence related to the litigants while exploring the effects that revising the judicial instructions have on the utilization of evidence in particular and on decision-making in general. ^ This dissertation was run on-line, allowing participants to access the study materials at their convenience. After giving consent, participants read the scenario of a fictitious product liability case with the litigant manipulations incorporated into the summary. Participants answered several attitudinal, case-specific, and comprehension questions, and were instructed to find in favor of one side and award any damages they felt warranted. Exploratory factor analyses, Probit and linear regressions, and path analyses were used to analyze the data (M-plus and SPSS were the software packages used to conduct the analyses). Results indicated that misuse of evidence was fairly frequent, though the mock jurors also utilized evidence appropriately. Although the results did not support bifurcation as a viable procedural reform, revising the judicial instructions did significantly increase comprehension rates. Trends in the data suggested that better decision-making occurred when the revised instructions were used, thus providing empirical support for this procedural reform as a means of improving civil jury decision-making. Implications for actual trials and attorneys are discussed. ^

How effective is the motion-to -suppress safeguard? Judges' perceptions of the suggestiveness and fairness of biased lineup procedures

The motion-to-suppress safeguard is designed to prevent false eyewitness identifications from leading to wrongful convictions. This safeguard is effective only if judges are sensitive to factors that influence lineup suggestiveness. The present study assessed judicial sensitivity to foil, instruction, and presentation biases. Judges $(N=99)$ read a description of a hypothetical crime, perpetrator, and identification procedure, followed by a motion to suppress the identification. Judges completed a questionnaire in which they ruled on the motion and rated the lineup's suggestiveness and fairness. Foil bias and instruction bias influenced judges' rulings and lineup evaluations as predicted. Hypotheses concerning presentation bias were not supported. Results suggest a need to standardize and record identification procedures and to further educate judges about psychological research on eyewitness memory. ^

The influence of the cross -race effect on lineup construction and fairness

Lineup procedures have recently garnered extensive empirical attention, in an effort to reduce the number of mistaken identifications that plague the criminal justice system. Relatively little attention, however, has been paid to the influence of the lineup constructor or the lineup construction technique on the quality of the lineup. This study examined whether the cross-race effect has an influence on the quality of lineups constructed using a match-to-suspect or match-to-description technique in a series of three phases. Participants generated descriptions of same- and other-race targets in Phase 1, which were used in Phase 2. In Phase 2, participants were asked to create lineups for own-race targets and other-race targets using one of two techniques. The lineups created in this phase were examined for lineup quality in Phase 3 by calculating lineup fairness assessments through the use of a mock witness paradigm. ^ Overall, the results of these experiment phases suggest that the race of those involved in the lineup construction process influences lineups. There was no difference in witness description accuracy in Phase 1, which ran counter to predictions based on the cross-race effect. The cross-race effect was observed, however, in Phases 2 and 3. The lineup construction technique used also influenced several of the process measures, selection estimates, and fairness judgments in Phase 2. Interestingly, the presence of the cross-race effect was in the opposite direction as predicted for some measures in both phases. In Phase 2, the cross-race effect was as predicted for number of foils viewed, but in the opposite direction for average time spent viewing each foil. In Phase 3, the cross-race effect was in the opposite direction than predicted, with higher levels of lineup fairness in other-race lineups. The practical implications of these findings are discussed in relation to lineup fairness within the legal system. ^

A Modified Resource Distribution Fairness Measure

An important issue of resource distribution is the fairness of the distribution. For example, computer network management wishes to distribute network resource fairly to its users. To describe the fairness of the resource distribution, a quantitative fairness score function was proposed in 1984 by Jain et al. The purpose of this paper is to propose a modified network sharing fairness function so that the users can be treated differently according to their priority levels. The mathematical properties are discussed. The proposed fairness score function keeps all the nice properties of and provides better performance when the network users have different priority levels.

An Exploration of Fairness in International Law through the Blue Nile and GERD

Peer reviewed

Fundamental Fairness in Sexual Misconduct Adjudications: Evaluating Private Universities for Due Process Rights in their Policies and Procedures

There is a national debate on how universities should respond to sexual assault, specifically the advantages and shortcomings of the campus adjudication Process. One major critique of university adjudication is that it does not provide the necessary due process rights to the accused and is therefore not fundamentally fair. This study seeks to assess this validity of this critique by seeing if sexual misconduct policies lack due process and if so, to what extent. This investigation is a comparative case study of 14 private higher education institutions, belonging to the Ivy Plus Society, analyzing their policy and procedure documents for indicators of due process. Findings show that schools are complying between 45% and 85% of due process indicators with an average of 65%. Colleges do lack due process rights and need to revise their policies and procedures to clearly present these rights. Key recommendations include guaranteeing a hearing procedure with impartial decision-makers and the opportunity to submit evidence and witnesses.

Dispute resolution outside of courts: procedural justice and decision acceptance among users of ombuds services in the UK

Attitudes towards legal authorities based on theories of procedural justice have been explored extensively in the criminal and civil justice systems. This has provided considerable empirical evidence concerning the importance of trust and legitimacy in generating cooperation, compliance and decision acceptance. However, not enough attention has been paid to attitudes towards institutions of informal dispute resolution. This paper asks whether the theory of procedural justice applies to the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) context, focusing on ombuds services. What are the predictors of perceptions of procedural justice during the process of dealing with an ombuds, and what factors shape outcome acceptance? These questions are analyzed using a sample of recent ombuds users. The results indicate that outcome favorability is highly correlated with perceived procedural justice, and both predict decision acceptance.

Effect of reading sport chronicles on the perception of justice and the predisposition to protest actions in soccer

In this study three chronicles from national newspapers (one generalist and two sport press) were analyzed. The chronicles belong to Spain’s soccer final of the King’s Cup in 2014. The aim of the study was to know if there was any influence on the readers’ perception of justice and consequently if this influence could cause a particular predisposition to participate in acts of protest. 462 university students participated. The results showed that different chronicles caused differences in the perception of justice depending on the chronicle read. However, a clear influence on the willingness to participate in acts of protest was not obtained. These results should make us think about the impact of sport press and its influence, and to be aware of the indirect responsibility of every sector on the antisocial behaviors generated by soccer in our country.

Reframing Public Inquiries as 'Procedural Justice' for Victims of Institutional Child Abuse: Towards a Hybrid Model of Justice

As the number of high profile cases of institutional child abuse mounts internationally, and the demands of victims for justice are heard, state responses have ranged from prosecution, apology, and compensation schemes, to truth commissions or public inquiries. Drawing on the examples of Australia and Northern Ireland as two jurisdictions with a recent and ongoing history of statutory inquiries into institutional child abuse, the article utilises the restorative justice paradigm to critically evaluate the strengths and limitations of the inquiry framework in providing ‘justice’ for victims. It critically explores the normative and pragmatic implications of a hybrid model as a more effective route to procedural justice and suggests that an appropriately designed restorative pathway may augment the legitimacy and utility of the public inquiry model for victims chiefly via improving offender accountability and ‘voice’ for victims. The article concludes by offering some thoughts on the broader implications for other jurisdictions in responding to large-scale historical abuses and seeking to come to terms with the legacy of institutional child abuse.

Procedural Justice in International Criminal Courts: Assessing Civil Parties’ Perceptions of Justice at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia

Procedural justice advocates argue that fair procedures in decision making processes can increase participant satisfaction with legal institutions. Little critical work has been done however to explore the power of such claims in the context of mass violence and international criminal justice. This article critically examines some of the key claims of procedural justice by exploring the perceptions of justice held by victims participating as Civil Parties in the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC). The ECCC has created one of the most inclusive and extensive victim participation regimes within international criminal law. It therefore provides a unique case study to examine some of claims of ‘victim-centred’ transitional justice through a procedural justice lens. It finds that while procedural justice influenced civil parties’ overall perceptions of the Court, outcomes remained of primary importance. It concludes by analysing the possible reasons for this prioritisation.

The carrier’s exemption from liability in the Hague, Hamburg and Rotterdam Rules : an examination from the perspectives of fairness and clarity

Le commerce international est souvent relié au transport maritime. La poursuite des règles uniformes se rapportant à ce dernier avait débuté à la fin du XIXe siècle et a abouti à l’émergence des Règles de La Haye, des Règles de Hambourg et des Règles de Rotterdam. L’exonération du transporteur maritime, qui suscitait des controverses favorisant le développement des règles maritimes internationales, a été réglementée de trois façons différentes dans les trois Règles précitées. La question principale abordée dans la thèse présente est si elles sont suffisamment satisfaisantes. Une autre question, qui se pose s’il est prouvé qu’aucune d’entre elles ne l’est, est quelle serait une meilleure façon. Pour y répondre, deux critères, soit la justice et la clarté, ont été choisis. Les recherches effectuées dans le cadre de la thèse présente visent à donner une évaluation profonde des régimes existants en matière de réglementation de l’exonération du transporteur maritime ainsi que des suggestions d’amélioration à cet égard.

Topics in Behavioural Economics - Information and Fairness. Revised edition

This thesis dwells upon topics in behavioural economics: information and fairness, with five research papers. The first two contributions are concerned with the extension of standard auction formats with information acquisition strategies. The third paper addresses global games framed as a speculative attack and tests theoretical predictions for risk and ambiguity. The fourth contribution deals with disclosing conflicts of interest, where one player has a monetary incentive to deceive. The last paper extends a standard model of social preferences with a second fairness dimension and studies how economic agents distort fairness norms exhibiting a self-serving bias effect.

Equality of opportunity, cultural diversity and claims for fairness

The present paper examines some of the tensions, problems and challenges associated with claims for equality of opportunity (the fairness argument). The introductory part identifies three separate forms of justification for public education, including the argument associated with equality of opportunity. Part II examines in detail two questions that reveal part of the anatomy of equality of opportunity: (1) what an opportunity is, and (2) when individuals’ opportunities are equal. This is followed by a presentation of the two basic principles of equality of opportunity: (1) the principle of non-discrimination, and (2) the “levelling the playing field” principle. The next part takes up the multiculturalist hypothesis advanced by minority groups for the accommodation and recognition of cultural diversity. This is followed by the identification of a set of claims comprising the “fairness argument”. The last section focuses on the “currency problem” associated with cultural diversity as a form of “unfair disadvantage”. Part V examines two of the major shortcomings associated with the multicultural conception of equality of opportunity, while the concluding part discusses some of the questions that must be answered by any conception of equal opportunities. (DIPF/Orig.)

SEEKING CULTURAL FAIRNESS IN A MEASURE OF RELATIONAL REASONING

Relational reasoning, or the ability to identify meaningful patterns within any stream of information, is a fundamental cognitive ability associated with academic success across a variety of domains of learning and levels of schooling. However, the measurement of this construct has been historically problematic. For example, while the construct is typically described as multidimensional—including the identification of multiple types of higher-order patterns—it is most often measured in terms of a single type of pattern: analogy. For that reason, the Test of Relational Reasoning (TORR) was conceived and developed to include three other types of patterns that appear to be meaningful in the educational context: anomaly, antinomy, and antithesis. Moreover, as a way to focus on fluid relational reasoning ability, the TORR was developed to include, except for the directions, entirely visuo-spatial stimuli, which were designed to be as novel as possible for the participant. By focusing on fluid intellectual processing, the TORR was also developed to be fairly administered to undergraduate students—regardless of the particular gender, language, and ethnic groups they belong to. However, although some psychometric investigations of the TORR have been conducted, its actual fairness across those demographic groups has yet to be empirically demonstrated. Therefore, a systematic investigation of differential-item-functioning (DIF) across demographic groups on TORR items was conducted. A large (N = 1,379) sample, representative of the University of Maryland on key demographic variables, was collected, and the resulting data was analyzed using a multi-group, multidimensional item-response theory model comparison procedure. Using this procedure, no significant DIF was found on any of the TORR items across any of the demographic groups of interest. This null finding is interpreted as evidence of the cultural-fairness of the TORR, and potential test-development choices that may have contributed to that cultural-fairness are discussed. For example, the choice to make the TORR an untimed measure, to use novel stimuli, and to avoid stereotype threat in test administration, may have contributed to its cultural-fairness. Future steps for psychometric research on the TORR, and substantive research utilizing the TORR, are also presented and discussed.