![]() Journal of Research and Development in Education, 18, 29–36. An investigation of the effects of note taking on college students' recall of signalled and unsignalled text. ![]() Would jurors do a better job if they could take notes? Judicature, 63(9), 436–443.įox, B., & Siedow, M. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 900–904.Ĭhicago Hanson Cab Co. Journal of Instructional Review, 6, 19–25.Ĭarter, J. Notetaking research: Implications for the classroom. American Sociological Review, 48, 386–397.Ĭahill v. An introduction to sample selection bias. The jury does not draw inappropriate inferences from unanswered questions, and questions do not have detectable prejudicial effects.īerk, R. ![]() Counsel are not reluctant to object to juror questions. Potential disadvantages of questions are not supported: Jurors do not ask inappropriate questions, are not embarrassed or angered by objections, do not become advocates rather than neutrals, and do not overemphasize their own questions and answers. Questions do not clearly help get to the truth, alert trial counsel to significant issues, or increase trial or verdict satisfaction. Results support the hypothesis that jury questioning promotes juror understanding of facts and issues. Juror notetaking does not favor either party and it consumes little time. Notetakers can keep pace with the trial, and they do not distract other jurors nor have an undue influence over non-notetakers. Jurors do not overemphasize noted evidence their notes do not produce a distorted view of the case. Results do not support the hypotheses that juror notes aid memory or increase satisfaction with the trial or verdict. Juror notetaking and question asking is examined in 160 trials.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |