No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
The Influence of Race, Heuristics, and Information Load on Judgments of Guilt and Innocence
Abstract
This study applies the heuristic-systematic model to explore the influence of race and judicial-system heuristics on jury decision-making. In a mock-jury investigation, a 3 × 2 experimental design varied a trial description's information load (high, medium, low) and defendant's race (Caucasian, African American). Two participant groups (Caucasian, African American) judged defendant characteristics and guilt. Observations demonstrate that race and legal-system heuristics alter guilt judgments. First, although Caucasian judgments were unaffected by race, an accused African American benefited from disproportionately positive judgments by African American appraisers. Second, information load moderated heuristic influence on guilt judgments. High load strengthened the negative effect of perceived judicial-system bias on verdicts of innocence.
... While jurors may want more experts to testify during the trial, Levett and Kovera (2008) have found that opposing expert testimony can create scepticism in jurors about all the expert testimony and lead to more guilty verdicts. Moreover, jurors who must process greater amounts of information tend to use heuristics (e.g., stereotypes) and misinterpret evidence, potentially making their verdict all the more biased and difficult to reach (see Horowitz & Bordens, 2000; see also Horowitz, Bordens, Victor, Bourgeois, & ForsterLee, 2001;Tamborini, Huang, Mastro, & Nabashi-Nakahara, 2007). ...
Women are more likely to be perceived as having a mental disorder than men are (McGlynn, Megas, & Benson, 1976). Accordingly, legal decision-makers are more likely to attribute a woman offender’s actions to mental illness in comparison to offenders who are men in insanity trials (see Yourstone, Lindholm, & Svenson, 2008). The purpose of this dissertation was to examine mock jury deliberations in a fabricated Not Criminally Responsible on Account of Mental Disorder case. I first examined the impact of defendant gender on jurors’ expressions of stereotype content (warmth and competence words) and affect. I used an exhaustive Stereotype Content domain dictionary to guide my directed quantitative content analysis of mock jurors’ group deliberations. I used the Linguistic Inquiry Word Count program (LIWC; see Pennebaker, Francis, & Booth, 2001) to comb deliberation transcripts to examine mock jurors’ affect towards the defendant (based on the language they used). Second, I examined how juror gender relates to verdict decisions; third, I examined how juror gender relates to speaking roles in deliberations. Fourth, I conducted a thematic analysis of the deliberations and examined how themes related to defendant and juror gender. Overall, these studies did not find significant differences in jurors’ use of stereotype content language or affect for men and women defendants. Moreover, I did not find a significant difference in the deliberation styles of women and men jurors. Through the thematic analysis, I found that jurors were generally focused on the mental health status of the defendant and the legitimacy of the NCRMD plea. The present research is of particular importance in Canada, where there is generally no procedural allowance for psycho-legal scholars’ questioning of jurors about their social attitudes (e.g., about women) before the trial and about their deliberations after the trial. As such, this dissertation provides a unique and exploratory “inside look” into how prospective jurors’ stereotypes and prejudices about the defendant’s gender may factor into deliberations in NCRMD trials.
... Since the set of stimuli presented to the respondents did not follow this base female criminality rate but had a significantly higher proportion of female criminals (50%), a more accurate identification of non-criminals than criminals was not a surprise. Also, it might be the case that in some females, when judging criminality from other female faces, the heuristics of "the presumed innocence" becomes activated (Johnson et al., 2018;Tamborini, Huang, Mastro, & Nabashi-Nakahara, 2007). ...
Every day, people make quick, spontaneous and automatic appearance-based inferences of others. This is particularly true for social attributes, such as intelligence or attractiveness, but also aggression and criminality. There are also indications that certain personality traits, such as the dark traits (i.e. Machiavellianism, narcissism, psychopathy, sadism), influence the degree of accuracy of appearance-based inferences, even though not all authors agree to this. Therefore, this study aims to investigate whether there are interpersonal advantages related to the dark traits when assessing someone's criminality. For that purpose, an on-line study was conducted on a convenience sample of 676 adult females, whose task was to assess whether a certain person was a criminal or not based on their photograph. The results have shown that narcissism and Machiavellianism were associated with a greater tendency of indicating that someone is a criminal, reflecting an underlying negative bias that the individuals high on these traits hold about people in general.
... Indeed, persuasive evidence in the literature shows juror performance suffers under high cognitive load. For example, jurors who must process greater amounts of information in a trial have been shown to use heuristics, struggle to return appropriate verdicts, and even misinterpret evidence (Horowitz & Bordens, 2000;Horowitz, Bordens, Victor, Bourgeois, & ForsterLee, 2001;Horowitz, ForsterLee, & Brolly, 1997;Tamborini, Huang, Mastro, & Nabashi-Nakahara, 2007). Although one might argue these findings have limited ecological validity due to the use of mock juror paradigms, research with actual jurors has yielded similar results, with juror confidence decreasing as the amount of information to be processed increases (Heuer & Penrod, 1994). ...
The Court of Appeal in England and Wales held (R. v. Sardar, 2012) there had been no exceptional circumstances that justified a jury retiring with a transcript of the complainant's interview. This paper reports an investigation into the impact multiple evidence forms and use of a judicial warning has on juror evaluations of a witness. The warning focuses juror attention on placing disproportionate weight on the evidence as opposed to their general impression of it. Sixty jury-eligible participants were presented with witness evidence in transcript, video, or transcript plus video format. Half the participants in each condition received the warning. All mock jurors completed a questionnaire which assessed perceptions of witness and task. Outcomes showed that transcript plus video evidence, when accompanied by a warning, did impact on mock jurors' global assessments of the witness. The warning made the task less clear for jurors and, in the video condition, led to higher ratings of how satisfactory and reliable the witness was. Findings support the provision of a judicial warning to jurors and show some initial support for judiciary opposition to the provision of an additional transcript only when jurors are asked to make the more usual global witness assessments.
... Examination of the American criminal justice system reveals that race plays an influential role in the courtroom, with racial minorities at a clear disadvantage (Mitchell, Haw, Pfeifer, & Meissner, 2005). That is, minority individuals are more likely to be linked with a crime, and then subsequently treated more severely by judges and juries alike (Blair, Judd, & Chapleau, 2004;Bottoms, Davis, & Epstein, 2004;Eberhardt, Davies, Purdie-Vaughns, & Johnson, 2006;Oliver, Jackson, Moses, & Dangerfield, 2004;Tamborini, Huang, Mastro, & Nabashi-Nakahara, 2007;Sommers & Ellsworth, 2001). Given that approximately 3 million minorities enter the criminal justice system every year (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2007), such racial biases should be a significant concern for legal practitioners. ...
Evaluations of videotaped criminal confessions can be influenced by the camera perspective taken during recording. Interrogations and confessions recorded with the camera directing observers' visual attention onto the suspect lead to biased judgments of the suspect. Although a camera perspective that directs visual attention onto the suspect and interrogator equally appears to promote unbiased judgments, investigations to date have relied on videotapes that depict only Caucasian suspects and interrogators. We examined the possibility that even equal-focus videotapes may become problematic when the suspect is a minority (e.g., Chinese American or African American) and the interrogator is Caucasian. That is, to the extent that Caucasian observers are inclined to direct more of their attention onto minorities, an effect documented previously, we expected biased judgments of the suspect to also occur in equal-focus videotapes. Three experiments provided evidence of this racial salience bias. Implications are discussed, including a practical way of avoiding the bias. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
In this column, the author describes a heuristic framework for teaching-learning nursing made of the humanbecoming paradigm, living the art of humanbecoming, and the humanbecoming teaching-learning model. A story helps to clarify the heuristic framework.
Many people believe the personal attributes of trial participants substantially impact the decisions of juries, and considerable research has examined the extent to which characteristics of jurors and defendants are associated with juror judgments of guilt. To assess this broad issue, we meta-analyzed empirical studies examining the relationship between 11 juror and defendant characteristics and individual-level judgments of guilt in criminal trial contexts. Three potential moderator variables were also investigated: participant type, outcome type, and case type. In total, 464 effects were obtained from 272 published and unpublished studies. The 11 focal characteristics yielded sample-weighted mean correlations ranging from zero to .22 in magnitude, with the strongest overall relationships emerging for defendant socioeconomic status (-.11), defendant criminal record (.12), juror authoritarianism (.17), and juror trust in the legal system (.22). There was, however, substantial evidence of moderation for 10 of the 11 characteristics, suggesting their overall relationships vary according to one or more other variables. Moderator analyses revealed little support for participant type, some support for outcome type, and good support for case type with regard to their ability to explain variation in the observed effects. Overall, several juror and defendant characteristics were associated strongly enough with guilt judgments to warrant the attention of scholars and legal practitioners, and the results of this work add to our understanding of extralegal bias and juror decision making.
In a significant break with traditional evidence rules and policies, the Federal Rules of Evidence concerning rape and child abuse, Rules 413 and 414, permit the government to admit the accused’s prior sexual misconduct as evidence of character and propensity. Although these rules have been roundly criticized, insufficient attention has been paid to the fact that in allowing propensity evidence for federal sex offenses (as opposed to offenses under state law), these rules disproportionately affect one distinct civilian population: Indians.The de facto concentration of Rules 413-414 cases in Indian Country raises troubling questions regarding what it means to have just and neutral evidence rules. The selective application of these character rules to a particular population violates important goals of evidence law, such as equal application, fair process, and focus on the event charged. The concentration of Indians among criminal defendants subject to Rules 413-414 exposes Indians to rules that allow jurors to convict relying on the accused’s propensities and prior sex offenses. This focus on prior bad acts can be unfair to the accused and distracting for the jury. It may also perpetuate stereotypes about Indians, subtly influencing the development and application of the rules.Relying on theories of how fact-finders use stereotypes, this Essay posits that applying Rules 413-414 to a discrete minority makes the propensity arguments seem more intuitively appealing, because the appearance of Indians as regulars at the defense table works to reinforce the perception that propensity evidence is valuable. Therefore, this Essay argues, the evidence experiment in Indian Country has helped pave the way for judicial acceptance of a dangerous new doctrine permitting propensity evidence in sex offense cases.
The ability of a civil jury to render fair and rational decisions in complex trials has been questioned. However, the nature, dimensions, and effects of trial complexity on decision making have rarely been addressed. In this research, jury-eligible adults saw a videotape of a complex civil trial that varied in information load and complexity of the language of the witnesses. Information load and complexity differentially affected liability and compensatory decisions. An increase in the number of plaintiffs decreased blameworthiness assigned to the defendant despite contrary evidence and amount of probative evidence processed. Complex language did not affect memory but did affect jurors' ability to appropriately compensate differentially worthy plaintiffs. Jurors assigned compensatory awards commensurate with the plaintiffs' injuries only under low-load and less complex language conditions.
One hundred twenty mock jurors heard 1 of several versions of a civil trial. The tort trial was either high or low in information load and contained evidence that either clearly favored the plaintiffs or was ambiguous. Expert witnesses testified in either technical or less technical language. Verdicts favored the plaintiffs when the evidence was clear and was presented in technical language because technical language enhanced witnesses' credibility when the evidence was clear. Although high information loads and technical language hindered evidence processing, jurors endeavored to comprehend, as indicated by the recall of more facts and alternative constructions of the evidence when that evidence was ambiguous. However, those constructions were of poorer quality, incorporating evidence of lesser probative value.
A field experiment examined effects of trial complexity and trial procedures on jury performance. Juror question asking and notetaking were randomly assigned to 75 civil and 85 criminal trials. Analyses of judges' responses revealed 3 components of trial complexity: evidence complexity, legal complexity, and quantity of information. None of these components was significantly related to judge–jury verdict agreement. Each component uniquely affected jurors' assessment of the trial, but none affected theirs or the judges' verdict satisfaction. Juror questions were most beneficial for assisting jurors with legal complexity and evidence complexity. Natural variation in judges' commenting on the weight and credibility of witnesses or summarizing the evidence, use of special verdict forms, pattern instructions, and juror orientation was also measured. Of these, use of special verdict forms appeared to provide the greatest benefits. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved)
299 undergraduates were exposed to either an easy- or difficult-to-understand persuasive message presented via the written, audiotaped, or videotaped modality. With difficult messages, both persuasion and comprehension of persuasive material were found to be greater when the message was written, compared to videotaped or audiotaped. With easy messages, persuasion was greatest for a videotaped message, moderate when audiotaped, and least when written, but comprehension was equivalent regardless of modality. The persuasion and comprehension findings, as well as results on other variables, are discussed within a framework that considers the effect of communication modality on the capacity for effective reception of information and on the tendency to yield to information. The communicator's nonverbal expressions of confidence, manipulated within audiotaped and videotaped conditions, did not affect opinions. Discussion focuses on the generalizability of the findings across message content.(35 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
An experiment with 182 undergraduates investigated the effect of chronic category accessibility on impression formation and recall under information overload and nonoverload conditions. Ss read about a person who behaved mainly honestly but sometimes dishonestly or about a mainly dishonest person who sometimes behaved honestly. Ss were divided into overload and nonoverload groups. In the nonoverload condition, Ss were given control over the presentation rate of the individual behavioral descriptions. These Ss formed an impression of the person during information acquisition and gave more processing to and had better free recall of the minority than the majority behaviors. In the overload condition, Ss were given only enough time to read each behavior once before the next was presented. Under these conditions, Ss with a chronically accessible category for honesty still formed an impression and had better recall of minority than majority behaviors, whereas Ss without such an accessible category did not. Implications for the generalizability of the person memory model, which was discussed by both R. Hastie (1980) and T. K. Srull (1981, 1984), and the conditions under which social judgments will and will not be based on memory are discussed. (57 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Varied the physical attractiveness of a criminal defendant (attractive, unattractive, or no information) and the nature of the crime (attractiveness-related or attractiveness-unrelated) in a factorial design. After reading 1 of the case accounts, 120 undergraduates sentenced the defendant to a term of imprisonment. An interaction was predicted: When the crime was unrelated to attractiveness (burglary), Ss would assign more lenient sentences to the attractive defendant than to the unattractive defendant; when the offense was attractiveness-related (swindle), the attractive defendant would receive harsher treatment. Results confirm the predictions, thereby supporting a cognitive explanation for the relationship between the physical attractiveness of defendants and the nature of the judgments made against them. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Critics of the civil jury system question whether jurors can adequately evaluate complex expert testimony. Based on current models of research in persuasion, we hypothesized that when expert testimony is complex, factors other than content will influence persuasion. Participants, serving as mock jurors, watched a videotaped trial in which two scientists provided evidence on whether PCBs could have caused a plaintiff's illness. The complexity of the expert's testimony and the strength of the expert's credentials were varied in a 22 factorial design. After watching the videotape, mock jurors rendered a verdict and completed a number of attitude measures related to the trial. Overall, consistent with our prediction, we found that jurors were more persuaded by a highly expert witness than by a less expert witness, but only when the testimony was highly complex. When the testimony was less complex, jurors relied primarily on the content of that testimony, and witness credentials had little impact on the persuasiveness of the message.
The hypothesis that finite limits exist to the amount of information consumers can effectively use was tested by operationalizing information load in terms of number of brands and amount of information per brand provided. The results of an experiment involving 192 housewives tend to confirm this hypothesis.
Two information-processing mechanisms that could potentially contribute to judgmental discrimination against the members of stereotyped social groups were examined in two experiments, using a mock juror decision-making task. Both postulated mechanisms involve biased processing of judgment-relevant evidence. The interpretation hypothesis asserts that the activation of stereotypic concepts influences the perceived probative implications of other evidence. The selective processing hypothesis asserts that stereotype-consistent evidence is processed more extensively than is inconsistent evidence. Judgment and memory data from the first experiment supported the general notion that stereotype-based discrimination emerges from biased evidence processing. The specific pattern of results supported selective processing rather than interpretation biases as the critical process underlying observed judgmental discrimination. The second experiment corroborated this conclusion by showing that a manipulation that prevents selective processing of the evidence effectively eliminated biases in judgments and recall pertaining to stereotyped targets. Implications for a general understanding of stereotyping and discrimination are discussed.
Subjects read information about a defendant in a criminal trial with initial instructions to judge either his guilt (guilt judgment objective) or his aggressiveness (trait judgment objective). The defendant was either Hispanic or ethnically nondescript. After considering the evidence, subjects made both guilt and aggressiveness judgments (regardless of which type of judgment they were instructed to make at the time they read the information) and then recalled as much of the information they read as they could. Results favored the hypothesis that when subjects face a complex judgmental situation, they use stereotypes (when available and relevant) as a way of simplifying the judgment. Specifically, they use the stereotype as a central theme around which they organize presented evidence that is consistent with it, and they neglect inconsistent information. Subjects with a (complex) guilt judgment objective judged the defendant to be relatively more guilty and aggressive and recalled more negative information about him if he was Hispanic than if he was ethnically nondescript. In contrast, subjects with a (simple) trait judgment objective did not perceive either the guilt or aggressiveness of the two defendants to be appreciably different, and did not display any significant bias in their recall of the evidence. These and other results are discussed in terms of the information-processing strategies subjects are likely to use when they expect to make different types of judgments.
In two experiments we investigated the effects of stereotyping on (a) reactions to a behavioral transgression and (b) the recall of information bearing on it. Subjects read a case file describing a transgression committed by a target (in Experiment 1, a job-related infraction; in Experiment 2, a criminal act). In some cases, the target's transgression was stereotypic of the target's ethnic group (conveyed through his name), and in other cases it was not. After reading the case file, subjects judged the likelihood that the transgression would recur and recommended punishment for the offense. These judgment data supported the hypothesis that stereotypes function as judgmental heuristics. Specifically, subjects used a stereotype of the target to infer the reasons for his transgression, and then based their punishment decisions on the implications of these inferences, considering other relevant information only when a stereotype-based explanation of the behavior was not available. However, recall data suggested that once a stereotype-based impression of the crime and its determinants was formed, subjects reviewed other available information in an attempt to confirm the implications of this impression. This led to differential recall of presented information, depending on whether its implications were consistent with, inconsistent with, or irrelevant to those of the stereotype.
In this article, the authors identify three methodological short-comings of the classic Princeton trilogy studies: (a) ambiguity of the instructions given to respondents, (b) no assessment of respondents' level of prejudice, and (c) use of an outdated list of adjectives. These shortcomings are addressed in the authors' assessment of the stereotype and personal beliefs of a sample of University of Wisconsin students. In contrast to the commonly espoused fading stereotype proposition, data suggest that there exists a consistent and negative contemporary stereotype of Blacks. Comparing the data from the Princeton trilogy studies with those of the present study, the authors conclude that the Princeton trilogy studies actually measured respondents' personal beliefs, not (as typically assumed) their knowledge of the Black stereotype. Consistent with Devine's model, high- and low-prejudiced individuals did not differ in their knowledge of the stereotype of Blacks but diverged sharply in their endorsement of the stereotype.
Studies of criminal justice processing of adults commonly report that females are accorded more lenient treatment than are males. These results have given rise to theories that chivalry and male paternalism cause gender discrimination. This study examines the relationship between gender and charge reduction in the criminal justice process. Analyses focus on (1) the extent to which gender affects charge reduction independent of other social and legal variables, and (2) whether gender operates indirectly through variables that are correlated with it. The data are drawn from one judicial district in Florida using information from presentence reports. Using a variety of measures, we find no evidence that there is differential treatment by gender in charge reduction considerations.
The present research considered the effects of stereotypes on judgmental and memorial processes. In particular, we investigated the heuristic utility of stereotype application in difficult or demanding information-processing contexts. Our results supported the prediction that stereotypical effects on memory are contingent upon the characteristics of the task environment. Whereas perceivers displayed preferential recall for stereotype-inconsistent information under low processing loads, this switched to a preference for consistent information as task demands increased. Likewise, target-based judgments were most stereotypic under high processing loads. Judgment-recall correlations supported the contention that, under high-loads, these inferences are related to the relative memorability of stereotypic information. We consider these findings in the wider context of stereotype-based effects on social cognition.
This study examines the impact of model selection on substantive conclusions about racial differences in presentence and sentencing practices. Using a statewide sample of convicted felons, an additive model is estimated to assess the direct and indirect effects of race on various dispositional decisions. Then, separate models for blacks and whites are estimated to evaluate within- and between-race differences. A comparison of the results from each specification illustrates how the standard additive approach used in past studies can mask and suppress racial differences in criminal processing. The findings of race-specific models are then discussed in terms of their implications for further research on racial disparity in the application of criminal sanctions.
This conceptual article uses an interpretive approach to legal decision-making to explain the operation of crime stereotypes in the courts. A model is proposed to address the social psychological dynamics involved in assessing both conforming and exceptional cases. Evaluated against the backdrop of prevailing stereotypes, conforming cases may be disposed of routinely, while exceptional cases present cognitive dilemmas for court actors. In that stereotypes are internalized as enduring mental structures, the latters’ dispositions require a more probing search for an explanation of the crime than is necessary with more typical offenses. Legal decisions in exceptional cases are influenced by the meaning court actors attribute to the offense within the context of the offender's alternative (i.e., noncriminal) social statuses. A series of interrelated propositions based on these arguments is formulated.
Previous research has shown a widespread bias among Hong Kong adolescents against Chinese Mainlanders. Based on social identity and social cognitive theories, we examined the effects of identity frame switching (situational induction of social category inclusiveness) and time pressure (environmental constraints on social information processing) on Hong Kong adolescents’ attitudes toward Chinese Mainlanders. Results indicated that Hong Kong adolescents had acquired a habitual tendency to make social comparisons within an exclusive regional framework of reference. This habitual tendency might lead to negative judgment biases toward Chinese Mainlanders, particularly when the adolescents made social judgments under time pressure. In addition, switching to an inclusive national frame of reference for social comparison attenuated negative intergroup attitudes. The theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.
The effect of four potential information load-producing variables on decision strategies and decision time and accuracy was
examined. These variables included two task-effects, the number of alternatives and attributes, and two context effects, the
variability of information on the attributes and alternative similarity. Number of alternatives had the most impact on decision
strategies, which were determined via protocols collected during a decision task. The four loadproducing variables all had
a significant effect on decision time, with the task-effect variables having the greatest influence. Of the two load-producing
variables that showed a significant relationship with decision accuracy, alternative similarity had the most impact.
The ability of a civil jury to render fair and rational decisions in complex trials has been questioned. However, the nature, dimensions, and effects of trial complexity on decision making have rarely been addressed. In this research, jury-eligible adults saw a videotape of a complex civil trial that varied in information load and complexity of the language of the witnesses. Information load and complexity differentially affected liability and compensatory decisions. An increase in the number of plaintiffs decreased blameworthiness assigned to the defendant despite contrary evidence and amount of probative evidence processed. Complex language did not affect memory but did affect jurors' ability to appropriately compensate differentially worthy plaintiffs. Jurors assigned compensatory awards commensurate with the plaintiffs' injuries only under low-load and less complex language conditions.
The study examined how the in-group/out-group status of a perpetrator of a distinctly violent crime might influence an eyewitness's evaluation of his behavior and a witness's performance in an identification task. Immigrant and Swedish students saw a film showing a simulated robbery, with an immigrant or a Swede as the perpetrator. Results showed that both groups evaluated an ethnically dissimilar perpetrator as more culpable than an ethnically similar perpetrator. In a line-up task, both immigrant and Swedish participants mistakenly identified an innocent immigrant more often than an innocent Swede. Participants' biased evaluations of the perpetrator are discussed in terms of cognitive and motivational mechanisms. Expectations regarding the typical ethnicity of a perpetrator of this type of crime are suggested to account for the findings of the line-up task.
One hundred twenty mock jurors heard 1 of several versions of a civil trial. The tort trial was either high or low in information load and contained evidence that either clearly favored the plaintiffs or was ambiguous. Expert witnesses testified in either technical or less technical language. Verdicts favored the plaintiffs when the evidence was clear and was presented in technical language because technical language enhanced witnesses' credibility when the evidence was clear. Although high information loads and technical language hindered evidence processing, jurors endeavored to comprehend, as indicated by the recall of more facts and alternative constructions of the evidence when that evidence was ambiguous. However. those constructions were of poorer quality, incorporating evidence of lesser probative value.
Downloaded by [Northeastern University
- R Tamborini
R. Tamborini et al. Downloaded by [Northeastern University] at 19:45 21 October 2014
Heuristic application and the juridic-decision making process: The role of media exposure and racial stereotypes Unpublished doctoral dissertation Unidimensional measurement, second order factor analysis, and causal models
- R Huang
Huang, R. (1998). Heuristic application and the juridic-decision making process: The role of media exposure and racial stereotypes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. Hunter, J. & Gerbing, D. (1982). Unidimensional measurement, second order factor analysis, and causal models. In B. Staw & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 267–320). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Inc.