Hinsz and Davis (1984)
found the more varied
the opinions, the greater
the shift in opinion
Deeper discussions
Stasser and Stewart (1992) found that even when
instructed to discuss all the information, the PP's
focussed almost entirely on the shared information and
virtually excluded all the non-shared information
Greater confidence
Kerr (1987) claimed knowing more
people are on your side allows majority
members to be more argumentative, so
their views are more compelling
Dangers of discussion
Myers and Kaplan (1976) found
after discussing low-guilt cases
the juries recommended a more
lenient punishment and the
high-guilt cases were more harsh
Minority
influence
An attribution
effect
Attribution theory;
their behaviour is
seen to be motivated
by a deep conviction
since they are
defending and
therefore we attribute
their beliefs to
internal, dispositional
causes rather than
external ones
Minority size
Tindale (1990) -
larger minorities are
more effective than
lone dissenters
Wood (1994) - increasing
numbers have a greater effect
increasing numbers mean that their
views cannot be easily dismissed
Evaluation of
Characteristics of the
Defendant
Ethnicity
Contradictory evidence
Mazzella and Feingold (1994) found no overall
effect of ethnicity on mock jury decisions
however, punishment was affected by ethnic group
The effect of the crime
effect of ethnic group varies with the crime
Gordon (1988) found that longer sentences were
given to black than to white defendants convicted
of burglary, but the reverse was true for fraud
Attributional bias
Johnson (2002) manipulated the ethnic group of
the defendant with a group of all white PP's
found PP's made more situational
attributions about the white defendant
and suggested more lenient
punishments than for the black
defendants, which could explain
ethnic differences
Physical attractivenss
The effect of the crime
effect of physical attractiveness
also varies with crime
Sigall and Ostrove (1975) found unattractive defendants were given
longer sentences for burglary but the reverse was true for fraud
supporting the idea that the attractiveness effect ceases to operate
if we believe that good looks have been used for criminal gain
Gender bias
Abwender and Hough (2001) found female jurors treated
attractive defendants significantly more leniently than
unattractive ones, but the reverse was true for male jurors
however, such evidence can be criticised because in court the judgement
of guilt or innocence is absolute, so the situation was not entirely realistic