Premium
Effect of Mode of Adjudication, Presence of Defense Counsel, and Favorability of Verdict on Observers' Evaluation of a Criminal Trial 1
Author(s) -
Austin William,
Williams Thomas A.,
Worchel Stephen,
Wentzel Allison Adler,
Siegel Daniel
Publication year - 1981
Publication title -
journal of applied social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.822
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1559-1816
pISSN - 0021-9029
DOI - 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1981.tb00825.x
Subject(s) - adversarial system , adjudication , plea , verdict , psychology , outcome (game theory) , quality (philosophy) , social psychology , interpretation (philosophy) , reasonable doubt , law , political science , computer science , epistemology , philosophy , mathematics , mathematical economics , programming language
In an experimental simulation, observers evaluated one of four different legal procedures in the presence of either a favorable or unfavorable outcome in a video‐taped reenactment of a criminal trial. The procedures were adversarial, inquisitorial, adversarial without lawyer, and adversarial with plea bargaining. Data were gathered on the fairness and perceived satisfaction of the defendant with the final outcome, and quality of the defense and prosecution. Contrary to previous research, results showed that the several different procedures were seen as equally fair and legitimate, which suggests that how a procedure is implemented may be more important than its structural properties in observers' overall evaluations. It was also found that defendants are seen as least satisfied when the ostensibly fairest procedure (eg, adversarial) yields an unfavorable outcome. This finding supports a frustration interpretation and contradicts previous studies which report adversarial to be the most preferred dispute resolution procedure within all outcome conditions.