Articles by Category
Articles by Issue
Current ContributorsWendy P. Heath, Ph.D.
Bruce D. Grannemann, M.A.
Sarah E. Malik
Jessica M. Salerno, PhD
Lynne Williams, Ph.D., J.D.
Mary E. Wood
Jacklyn E. Nagle, M.A.
Pamela Bucy Pierson, J.D.
Adam B. Shniderman, Ph.D.
Rita R. Handrich, Ph.D.
Ronald K. Bullis, Ph.D., J.D.
Barnes & Roberts
Keene Trial Consulting
- @attorneymediate on A Qualitative Examination of Self-Care in Lawyers
- @ScattergoodFdn on A Qualitative Examination of Self-Care in Lawyers
- Katherine Bender on A Qualitative Examination of Self-Care in Lawyers
- Scripturient on Panic Over the Unknown: America Hates Atheists
- Rita Handrich @ The Jury Room on Book Review: Law and Neuroscience
- @LitigationBids on Ten Dynamite Tips to Improve Your Results From Group Voir Dire
- @NeuroscienceLaw on The Selective Allure of Neuroscience and Its Implications for The Courtroom
- @mghclbb on The Selective Allure of Neuroscience and Its Implications for The Courtroom
Current Issue - November 2014, Vol. 26 No. 4
Does Video Image Size Affect Jurors’ Decisions? A Look at How Image Size Interacts with Evidence Strength, Defendant Emotion and the Defendant/Victim Relationshipby Wendy P. Heath, Ph.D.
and Bruce D. Grannemann, M.A.
Wendy Heath and Bruce Grannemann ponder how video image size in the courtroom is related to juror decision-making about your case. They discuss how image size interacts with image strength, defendant emotions, and the defendant/victim relationship.
by Sarah E. Malik
and Jessica M. Salerno, PhD
You may not be surprised to hear there is bias against young GLBT defendants in court but you may be surprised at the reason behind that bias: moral outrage. In this brief research report, we hear about two studies (one on the gay panic defense and one on juvenile sex offender registration) and hear reactions from trial consultants.
by Lynne Williams, Ph.D., J.D.
How do you choose a jury for a antiwar protestor trial versus a jury for a civil disobedience trial? An experienced trial consultant offers a peek into her brain as she chooses two very different juries.
by Mary E. Wood
and Jacklyn E. Nagle, M.A.
and Pamela Bucy Pierson, J.D.
Depression and suicide among attorneys have been more publicly discussed in the last few years following some high profile attorney suicides. If you are depressed, get help. Take a look at this article for information on coping skills that work best for depression, stress, and other kinds of distress.
by Brian Patterson
Why, you may wonder, would Plain Text EVER be a Favorite Thing. Because it is fabulous. Or, perhaps because, “Plain text is the cockroach of file types: it will outlive us all.”
by Adam B. Shniderman, Ph.D.
Neuroscience evidence is not alluring to everyone. Just to some. Thorough voir dire becomes critically important to the attorney who wants to understand those composing a jury.
by Rita R. Handrich, Ph.D.
A review of the new tome, Law and Neuroscience. A reference manual, a textbook, and a surprisingly good read. Memorable quote: “Brains don’t kill people. People kill people.”
by Ronald K. Bullis, Ph.D., J.D.
Lawyers and social scientists. Different professions. Different languages. Different professional cultures. How do you talk so your social science expert witness understands you?
by Rita R. Handrich, Ph.D.
Note from the Editor for November 2014.
Previous Issue - August 2014, Vol. 26, No. 3
by Douglas L. Keene, Ph.D.
and Rita R. Handrich, Ph.D.
Authored by Doug Keene and Rita Handrich with a response from Paul Begala, this article takes a look at how the country has changed over the past 2 decades and our old definitions of Democrat or Republican and conservative or liberal are simply no longer useful. What does that mean for voir dire? What should it mean for voir dire? Two very good questions those.
by Ivar Hannikainen, Ph.D.
and Ryan Miller
and Fiery Cushman, Ph.D.
Authored by Ivar Hannikainen, Ryan Miller and Fiery Cushman with responses from Ken Broda-Bahm and Alison Bennett, this article has a lesson for us all. It isn’t what that terrible, awful defendant did that makes me want to punish, it’s how I think I would feel if I did that sort of terrible, horrible awful thing. That’s what makes me want to punish you. It’s an interesting perspective when we consider what makes jurors determine lesser or greater punishment.
by Jillian M. Ware
and Jessica L. Jones
and N.J. Schweitzer, Ph.D.
Authored by Jillian M. Ware, Jessica L. Jones, and Nick Schweitzer with responses from Ekaterina Pivovarova and Stanley L. Brodsky, Adam Shniderman, and Ron Bullis. Remember how fearful everyone was about the CSI Effect when the research on the ‘pretty pictures’ of neuroimagery came out? In the past few years, several pieces of research have sought to replicate and extend the early findings. These studies, however, failed to find support for the idea that neuroimages unduly influence jurors. This overview catches us up on the literature with provocative ideas as to where neurolaw is now.
by Matthew Groebe, Ph.D.
and Garold Stasser, Ph.D.
and Kevin-Khristián Cosgriff-Hernandez, M.A.
Authored by Matthew Groebe, Garold Stasser, and Kevin-Khristián Cosgriff-Hernandez, this paper gives insight into how jurors may be leaning in support of one side or the other at various points during the trial. This is a project completed using data from actual mock trials (and not the ubiquitous undergraduate).
by Brian Patterson
What works best when organizing thoughts and tasks? Free association or maintaining order? Our Favorite Thing gives you the best of both worlds.
by Mykol C. Hamilton, Ph.D.
and Emily Lindon, B.S.
and Madeline Pitt, B.S.
and Emily K. Robbins, B.S.
Authored by Mykol C. Hamilton, Emily Lindon, Madeline Pitt, and Emily K. Robbins, with responses from Charli Morris and Diane Wiley, this article looks at how to not “prehabilitate” your jurors and offers ideas about alternate ways of asking the question rather than the tired, old “can you be fair and unbiased?”.
by Shelby Forsythe
and Monica K. Miller, J.D., Ph.D.
Authored by Shelby Forsythe and Monica K. Miller, with a response from Richard Gabriel. This article examines the reactions of research participants to a number of novel defenses (Amnesia, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Battered Women Syndrome (BWS), Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD), Post-Partum Depression (PPD), and Gay Panic Defense) and makes recommendations on how (as well as whether or not) to use these defenses.
by David Caditz, Ph.D.
Authored by David M. Caditz with responses from Roy Futterman and Edward Schwartz. Suppose there was a more predictable, accurate and efficient way of exercising your peremptory strikes? Like using a computer model based on game theory? In this article, a physicist presents his thoughts on making those final decisions more logical and rational and based on the moves opposing counsel is likely to make.
by Rita R. Handrich, Ph.D.
As we reach the dog days of summer and triple digit temperatures (and humidity pushing triple digits in some parts of the country), it’s a perfect time to sit in air-conditioned comfort with an adult beverage and ponder the plethora of possibilities in this penultimate Jury Expert issue for 2014. […]