Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 22 - Deciphering Directives

  • from Part III - Trial Phase Decision-Making
  • Edited by Monica K. Miller, University of Nevada, Reno, Logan A. Yelderman, Prairie View A & M University, Texas, Matthew T. Huss, Creighton University, Omaha, Jason A. Cantone, George Mason University, Virginia
  • Book:
    The Cambridge Handbook of Psychology and Legal Decision-Making
    Published online:
    22 February 2024
    Print publication:
    29 February 2024, pp 339-354

  • Summary

    In the United States, judges use “pattern instructions” to inform jurors of laws relevant to the case at hand, and for the procedures they are to use in order to carry out their duties. Although these instructions are written in a legally accurate manner, social science research has demonstrated that they are often not well understood by jurors, who consequently render decisions based on an incomplete, or inaccurate, understanding of the law. This chapter reviews factors that lead to comprehension problems associated with judicial instructions, including: the language and sentence structure typically used to write instructions, jurors’ education level and life experiences that contribute to preexisting beliefs about the law, and trial complexity. The chapter also reviews the effectiveness of solutions that have been proposed for improving jurors’ understanding of judicial instructions, so that more legally accurate decisions can be rendered.