Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Factors promoting conformity
Factors promoting conformity
Factors promoting conformity
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Factors promoting conformity
1. Discuss the roles of conformity, persuasion, group processes (such as group polarization or groupthink), social comparison, stress, leadership, and/or attribution. Which processes would you argue are going to be most significant during jury deliberation? In jury duty selection and deliberation all of the roles discussed in social psychology will be significant, as to how the jury will engage, react, and make decisions. Conformity is something that people have a natural tendency to do, when they are involved in groups. Persuasion to one point of view versus another, can be helpful or harmful in the decision process. Group process or group think will align individuals in their point of view, this can be good or bad as well, and this ties in with conformity and self-comparison. Self-comparison is something that people do to evaluate themselves against their peers (Kassin, Fein, & Markus, 2014). Jury deliberation does account for stress, the jurors may feel pressure to conform, or they may feel the stress of time considerations on their decision. Stress can result from knowing that your decision will alter another person’s life, in this process. I believe attribution and the selection of a leader in the process of jury selection and deliberation can both be significant. There is …show more content…
“His or her view could be vital in shifting the direction of the discussions. When there are ambiguities or conflicting positions within the group, he or she is the one entitled to resolve these (Ramesh, 1993).” Studies have indicated that the leader of the group is usually upper class and male, there is a lower incidence of women and minorities that are picked as the leader of the group, and it has been shown that even when the other jurors do not have any idea of their social or financial status, they will pick this type of person with subconscious cues (Ramesh,
The movie Runaway Jury starts with a shooting in a business office. The movie then continues to people receiving jury summons and people taking pictures of them. It goes on to show Rankin Fitch and the defense committing electronic surveillance during the jury selections. This movie shows how Fitch and the defense attempt to influence the jury to vote for the defense. The movie continuously shows a person by the name of “Marlee” who talks to Fitch and Rohr trying to persuade them to pay her in order for the jury to be “swayed” their way. “Marlee” is Nick Easter’s girlfriend. As the movie progresses, the viewer realizes that Nick was pretended to get avoid jury duty in order to secure a spot in the jury. The movie ends with the jury voting against the gun company and then Nick and “Marlee” blackmailing Fitch with a receipt for $15 million and they demand that he retire immediately. They inform him that the $15 million will benefit the shooting victims in the town of Gardner.
There are quite a few specific factors that affect whether the minority can influence the majority’s opinion. For example, when Juror #9 becomes an ally of support for Juror #8 in his defection from the majority consensus. Although Juror #8 may have started with only one ally, gradually he gained support from other jury members. Another important factor in the power of minority influence (Myers, 298) is the consistency of the viewpoint. Juror #8 never ‘flip-flops’, proponents of the minority position must stand firm against the pressure to conform. Even when Juror #8 is taunted by his fellow jurors after voting not-guilty in the initial vote he stands firm on his position and resists the pressure to conform. Furthermore, high self-confidence and self-assurance improves the position of the minority. Juror #8 presented firm and forceful arguments without being overbearing. He justifies his not-guilty vote by saying, “I just think we owe him a few words, that's all.” In the film, there is also a point in the discussion where Juror #6 defends those who voted not-guilty from the bullying, shouting, and name-calling from the other jurors. Throughout the film, Juror #3 is a bully, a specific example of insulting nature it seen in the film when another not-guilty ballot is received and he attacks Juror #5. He shouts, “Brother, you really are somethin'. You sit here vote guilty like the rest of us, then some golden-voiced preacher starts tearing your poor heart out about some underprivileged kid, just couldn't help becoming a murderer, and you change your vote. Well, if that isn't the most sickening - *why don't you drop a quarter in his collection box?” his criticisms of the other jurors does not sway people to his side. In reality, when a minority gathers strength people feel freer to think outside the box without the fear
The American Jury system has been around for quite some time. It was the original idea that the framers of the constitution had wanted to have implemented as a means of trying people for their illegal acts, or for civil disputes. The jury system has stood the test of time as being very effective and useful for the justice system. Now it has come into question as to if the jury system is still the best method for trials. In the justice system there are two forms of trials, one being the standard jury trial, where 12 random members of society come together to decide the outcome of something. The other option would be to have a bench trial. In a bench trial, the judge is the only one deciding the fate of the accused. While both methods are viable
Mention the pros and cons of our jury system and possible alternatives of it. Also, identify the group dynamics of the jury members
Guilty or not guilty? This the key question during the murder trial of a young man accused of fatally stabbing his father. The play 12 Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, introduces to the audience twelve members of a jury made up of contrasting men from various backgrounds. One of the most critical elements of the play is how the personalities and experiences of these men influence their initial majority vote of guilty. Three of the most influential members include juror #3, juror #10, and juror #11. Their past experiences and personal bias determine their thoughts and opinions on the case. Therefore, how a person feels inside is reflected in his/her thoughts, opinions, and behavior.
As one of the seven jury deliberations documented and recorded in the ABC News television series In the Jury Room the discussions of the jurors were able to be seen throughout the United States. A transcript was also created by ABC News for the public as well. The emotions and interactions of the jurors were now capable of being portrayed to anyone interested in the interworkings of jury deliberations. The first task,...
In the United States, jury trials are an important part of our court system. We rely heavily on the jury to decide the fate of the accused. We don’t give a second thought to having a jury trial now, but they were not always the ‘norm’.
In our society today citizens play a vital role in the legal system by serving as jury. A jury is a sworn body of people convened to render an impartial verdict (a finding of fact on a question) officially submitted to them by a court, or to set a penalty or judgment (Wikipedia). 12 citizens are selected to serve as jury on a particular trial. In the movie, “12 Angry Men”, 12 ordinary citizens were called to serve as jury in a case to decide the verdict of a murder trial. I’m choosing these three jurors on my legal team based on their character and contribution during the jury trial as portrayed in the movie. They are juror number one, Martin Balsam, juror eight, Henry Fonda (Davis) and juror 11, George Voskovec.
...a unanimous vote of not guilty. The final scene takes place signifying the "adjourning stage". Two of the jurors, eight and three exchange the only character names mentioned during the film. The entire process of groupthink occurs in multiple ways that display its symptoms on individual behavior, emotions, and personal filters. These symptoms adversity affected the productivity throughout the juror's debate. In all, all twelve men came to an agreement but displayed group social psychological aspects.
The jury in a trial is selected to examine certain facts and determine truth based only upon the evidence presented to them in court. It is assumed that the jurors will judge fairly and without any personal bias. In spite of this assumption people will be people and in some cases, logic and emotion will collide. An excellent example that shows precisely what I’m talking about is in the movie Twelve Angry Men. Twelve men who initially are strangers to each other have the fate of a young boy resting in the palm of their hands. In the beginning everyone is convinced he is guilty except one who has one reasonable doubt in his mind. The single man on his own was able to convince each of them by using logic to examine the testimony of each witness. After a few hours of reasoning the jurors were eventually won over allowing the facts to overcome their personal issues. During the arguments in the jury room the issues of race, age, social class, personal experience and stereo types are discussed a number of times. I presume it is because those are the personal issues that people have and sometimes that is what they base their judgment on. When you are in a jury you have the responsibility of setting all of that aside. Through the reasoning of the not-guilty voters the guilty voters are slowly realizing that despite their passed and personal reasons they have to take into consideration the more important actual events that occurred. Part of the problem the jurors are...
The American Jury system is a judicial process that has been revered as being one of the key practices that ensure the liberties that the United States holds dear. The founding fathers considered it vital to ensuring a fair trial and it has continued to be seen as such. This system isn’t perfect, but it’s still an incredibly valuable tool for democracy, if used well. The American jury system, when used correctly, engages citizens with their local government, creates a wide distribution of power, and ensures impartial rulings.
Stevenson, D 2012, The function of uncertainty within jury systems, George Mason Law Review, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 513-548, viewed 6 May 2014, .
Evidence is one of the leading causes of jury bias because of its statistically significant impact on a jury’s final decision. There have been faults in verdicts due to poorly given evidence.“A major criticism of the jury system is that jurors frequently lack the capacity or competence to understand all aspects of the evidence, particularly in longer and more complex trials”(Tinsley, Yvette). If members of the jury are unaware of what the evidence is directly stating, they are more likely to present inaccurate arguments in jury
Judges preside over criminal and non-criminal proceeding as an impartial party to the evidence and arguments presented by the defense and prosecuting attorneys. His or her role as a judge in a jury trial is to act as a mediator between the defense and prosecution ensuring proper court room procedures are being followed to guarantee that a fair trial is administered. Judges are charged with hearing testimony, arguments and viewing evidence determining what is strong enough to support proof beyond reasonable doubt and passes judgment of guilt or innocents based on facts presented (Judges Role in Court, n.d.). Similarly, juries will take on the judge’s role in a trial by jury to determine proof beyond reasonable doubt of prove guilt or innocents. Judges in any case can remove testimony, statements or evidence from any portion of the trial if he or she feels it to be not in accordance procedure, not pertinent, bias, corrupt or weak. Last, once a defendant is convicted the
The quietness and patience juror 8 displayed caused tension amongst the other jurors creating careful and adequate (Flouri & Fitsakis, 2007, p.453) deliberations. Juror 8 's circle of influence (Covey, 2013) directly influenced the other jurors’ circle of concern (Covey, 2013) when forcing them to question their thought process. Juror 8 chose a collaborative negotiation (Budjac Corvette, 2007, p. 63) method when deliberating with the other jurors immediately handing down guilty verdicts for the defendant. Furthermore, juror 8 used his ACES to help the other jurors cross the creek (Budjac Corvette, 2007, p.