Emotional evidence and jurors' judgments

The promise of neuroscience for informing psychology and law

Jessica Salerno, Bette L. Bottoms

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

37 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article is a review of psychological and neuroscience research addressing how juror decision making is influenced by emotion elicited from potentially disturbing evidence such as gruesome autopsy photographs, victim impact statements, and information about a defendant's tragic personal history presented as mitigating evidence. We review (a) converging evidence suggesting that the presence versus absence of such evidence results in more punitive juror judgments, (b) social cognition theories that provide potential explanations for these effects, and (c) neuroscience research aimed at understanding the role of emotion in moral judgments by identifying how brain activity is affected by emotion-eliciting stimuli. We argue that neuroimaging evidence showing that emotional stimuli cause heightened emotion and decreased effortful cognitive processing is relevant in understanding jurors' increased punitiveness after being exposed to emotional evidence, and in turn relevant to debates about the admissibility of emotional evidence in courts of law. Ultimately, we argue for more ecologically valid psychological research to clarify these important issues.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)273-296
Number of pages24
JournalBehavioral Sciences and the Law
Volume27
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Neurosciences
neurosciences
Emotions
psychology
Psychology
Law
emotion
evidence
Research
Neuroimaging
stimulus
Cognition
Autopsy
Decision Making
moral judgement
social cognition
Brain
brain
decision making
cause

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Cite this

Emotional evidence and jurors' judgments : The promise of neuroscience for informing psychology and law. / Salerno, Jessica; Bottoms, Bette L.

In: Behavioral Sciences and the Law, Vol. 27, No. 2, 2009, p. 273-296.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f153a51298cf40f4bd68f0efb0d737b5,
title = "Emotional evidence and jurors' judgments: The promise of neuroscience for informing psychology and law",
abstract = "This article is a review of psychological and neuroscience research addressing how juror decision making is influenced by emotion elicited from potentially disturbing evidence such as gruesome autopsy photographs, victim impact statements, and information about a defendant's tragic personal history presented as mitigating evidence. We review (a) converging evidence suggesting that the presence versus absence of such evidence results in more punitive juror judgments, (b) social cognition theories that provide potential explanations for these effects, and (c) neuroscience research aimed at understanding the role of emotion in moral judgments by identifying how brain activity is affected by emotion-eliciting stimuli. We argue that neuroimaging evidence showing that emotional stimuli cause heightened emotion and decreased effortful cognitive processing is relevant in understanding jurors' increased punitiveness after being exposed to emotional evidence, and in turn relevant to debates about the admissibility of emotional evidence in courts of law. Ultimately, we argue for more ecologically valid psychological research to clarify these important issues.",
author = "Jessica Salerno and Bottoms, {Bette L.}",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1002/bsl.861",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "27",
pages = "273--296",
journal = "Behavioral Sciences and the Law",
issn = "0735-3936",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Emotional evidence and jurors' judgments

T2 - The promise of neuroscience for informing psychology and law

AU - Salerno, Jessica

AU - Bottoms, Bette L.

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - This article is a review of psychological and neuroscience research addressing how juror decision making is influenced by emotion elicited from potentially disturbing evidence such as gruesome autopsy photographs, victim impact statements, and information about a defendant's tragic personal history presented as mitigating evidence. We review (a) converging evidence suggesting that the presence versus absence of such evidence results in more punitive juror judgments, (b) social cognition theories that provide potential explanations for these effects, and (c) neuroscience research aimed at understanding the role of emotion in moral judgments by identifying how brain activity is affected by emotion-eliciting stimuli. We argue that neuroimaging evidence showing that emotional stimuli cause heightened emotion and decreased effortful cognitive processing is relevant in understanding jurors' increased punitiveness after being exposed to emotional evidence, and in turn relevant to debates about the admissibility of emotional evidence in courts of law. Ultimately, we argue for more ecologically valid psychological research to clarify these important issues.

AB - This article is a review of psychological and neuroscience research addressing how juror decision making is influenced by emotion elicited from potentially disturbing evidence such as gruesome autopsy photographs, victim impact statements, and information about a defendant's tragic personal history presented as mitigating evidence. We review (a) converging evidence suggesting that the presence versus absence of such evidence results in more punitive juror judgments, (b) social cognition theories that provide potential explanations for these effects, and (c) neuroscience research aimed at understanding the role of emotion in moral judgments by identifying how brain activity is affected by emotion-eliciting stimuli. We argue that neuroimaging evidence showing that emotional stimuli cause heightened emotion and decreased effortful cognitive processing is relevant in understanding jurors' increased punitiveness after being exposed to emotional evidence, and in turn relevant to debates about the admissibility of emotional evidence in courts of law. Ultimately, we argue for more ecologically valid psychological research to clarify these important issues.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=65549111218&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=65549111218&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/bsl.861

DO - 10.1002/bsl.861

M3 - Article

VL - 27

SP - 273

EP - 296

JO - Behavioral Sciences and the Law

JF - Behavioral Sciences and the Law

SN - 0735-3936

IS - 2

ER -