Search

In the current study we examine attitudes towards internationalism through the lens of a specific set of constructs necessary in defining an effective global leader. One hundred fifty-nine undergraduates responded to items measuring need for cognition, cultural intelligence, and a set of items measuring the correlates of global mindset. In addition, they provided their attitudes on items measuring internationalism. A series of linear regression analyses revealed cultural intelligence, need for cognition and traveling abroad predicted students' preference for working full-time in a foreign country. In addition, underclassmen were more likely to endorse the notion that the US culture is superior to other cultures compared to upperclassmen. Results support the importance of exposure to a diverse curriculum in shaping undergraduate students' global mindset.

Non-criminal preventive detention is justified by both the state's parens patriae and police power roles. Individuals with mental illness and individuals with a highly communicable, potentially lethal disease can be involuntarily detained. Modern applications of quarantine have led to higher court decisions that address the balance between liberty and public health and safety. The inherent tensions that underlie quarantine law - individual liberty versus public safety - are apparent in our contemporary, COVID-19 America. Consequently, much of the current discussion appears to have political overtones. In order to empirically address this issue, in the current study we examine attitudes towards preventive detention within the context of resisting quarantine due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, we investigate whether participants report pre- and post-COVID differences in their tolerance for ambiguity, perceived vulnerability to disease and endorsement of procedural justice. Finally, to test the presence of political overtones, we examine the predictive ability of political ideology on participants' endorsement of preventive detention. We observed a significant association between participants identified as Right Wing and support for non-criminal preventive detention. Our findings add to evidence that assessment of and response to the COVID-19 pandemic is sharply divided along political ideologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current study applies the perspective of decision theory to understanding how choices are made in an in-group setting involving social pressure and risk. Two hundred sixty-one undergraduate students provided assessments of consequences associated with illegally consuming alcohol in different environments with differing degrees of risk. In addition, size of the social group was varied as three, four, or nine. In order to determine the moderating effects, if any, of susceptibility to social influence, a measure of socialization was included. Results provide strong support for socialization as an explanation for how individuals interpret risk-related social situations. (Contains 5 tables.)

Evidence obtained through the process of interrogation is frequently undermined by what can be perceived as overzealous interrogation tactics. Although the majority of psychologically oriented tactics are legally permissible, they nonetheless contribute to innocent suspects confessing to crimes they did not commit. The present study examined the effect of expert testimony and interrogation tactics on perceptions of a confession. 182 undergraduates read a transcript of a homicide trial that varied based on interrogation tactic: implicit threat of punishment (maximization) or leniency (minimization) and expert witness testimony (presence or absence of expert testimony). Analysis indicated that the type of interrogation tactic used in obtaining the confession affected participants' perceptions of the coerciveness of the interrogation process. DOI 10.2466/PR0.100.2.563-570

Undergraduates (N = 349) at a multicutural metropolitan university were surveyed to assess (a) beliefs and evaluations of potential components of affirmative action plans (AAPs), (b) correlations between attitudes toward affirmative action and such beliefs and evaluations, (c) differences in reactions as a function of the AAP target (minorities, women, or people with disabilities), and (d) gender and ethnic differences in the results of a, b, and c. Many beliefs about affirmative action were incorrect. Recruitment, training, and attention to applicant qualifications were favored, whereas discrimination, quotas, and preferential treatment were opposed. Opposition to potential AAP components was directly related to the weight given to demographic status. Responses varied depending on gender and ethnicity. Conflict associated with affirmative action can be minimized by eliminating certain misperceptions about AAPs and by incorporating positively evaluated components. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Historically, Black defendants have faced more severe sentences compared to White defendants. Research investigating this phenomenon in the paradigm of the insanity defense, found that Black defendants were acquitted as "not guilty by reason of insanity" (NGRI) significantly more often than White defendants (Poulson, 1990). In the current study, we investigate the influence of race of defendant and race of victim on judgments of NGRI in a 3 (race of victim: Black v. White v. Hispanic) x 3 (race of defendant: Black v. White v. Hispanic) between-subjects design. Our results indicated that a Hispanic defendant was acquitted NGRI more frequently and perceived as least dangerous compared to Black and White defendants. Assessments of future dangerousness were greatest when the defendant was Black and the victim was White. This finding provides supporting evidence of a crossrace effect within the context of criminal responsibility (Baldus et al., 1998). In addition, our findings offer an alternative to Poulson (1990), expanding this research to include Hispanic minorities as essential in this paradigm, and contribute to the research on the cross-race victim effect with juror decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Preventive detention laws are intended to protect the community while providing continuing offender rehabilitation. The concept of preventive detention frequently challenges the notion of 'just desert'. With respect to civil commitment, defendants are held involuntarily for treatment beyond their sentencing. In a criminal context, defendants may be held in lieu of a criminal conviction. In the current study, we assessed the public's level of tolerance for preventive detention. We were interested in evaluating whether and to what extent a "crime hierarchy" exists for preventive detention; i.e., a perception that certain crimes are deserving of preventive detention compared to others. The results indicate that societal justifications for such confinement may stem from inherent perceptions of dangerousness rather than adherence to specific sentencing goals, political ideology, or criminal offense. This study's findings suggest that the pubic is highly tolerant of the use of preventive detention, particularly with crimes viewed as abborent or dangerous. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT. According to R. B. Zajonc's (1965) drive theory of social facilitation, the mere presence of others increases arousal and, thereby, the frequency of dominant responses (i.e., responses with the [...]

In the current study we examine attitudes towards internationalism through the lens of a specific set of constructs necessary in defining an effective global leader. One hundred fifty-nine undergraduates responded to items measuring need for cognition, cultural intelligence, and a set of items measuring the correlates of global mindset. In addition, they provided their attitudes on items measuring internationalism. A series of linear regression analyses revealed cultural intelligence, need for cognition and traveling abroad predicted students' preference for working full-time in a foreign country. In addition, underclassmen were more likely to endorse the notion that the US culture is superior to other cultures compared to upperclassmen. Results support the importance of exposure to a diverse curriculum in shaping undergraduate students' global mindset. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the current study we examined how jurors utilize evidence of childhood abuse as a function of expert testimony and sentence recommendation. We also varied the specificity of instructional language in the context of mitigating circumstances. We predicted jurors who impose a life sentence would rate evidence of childhood abuse as significantly more important in determining sentence compared to jurors who impose the death penalty. Furthermore, we expected this effect to be moderated by expert testimony. Testimony of childhood abuse increased importance ratings of non-statutory mitigating circumstances. This effect was more evident for jurors who imposed a life sentence compared to those who imposed the death penalty. In addition, specific instructional language influenced how jurors considered circumstances related to the defendant's life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prosecutorial misconduct in the form of improper closing argument has been identified as a leading cause of unfairness in capital trials. the U.S. Supreme Court has indicated that arguments with the potential to unduly influence the jury should be clarified by a specific judicial instruction. The present study investigated the effectiveness of varying instructions on sentence recommendations and perceptions of improper prosecutor argument. Results indicated that the inclusion of a specific, cautionary instruction led to significantly less death penalty recommendations compared to a brief, general instruction. In addition, instructions minimized the importance of the misconduct statements on participants' sentence recommendations. Findings provide support for the validity of judicial instructions as a legal safeguard against prosecutorial misconduct in capital sentencing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current study applies the perspective of decision theory to understanding how choices are made in an in-group setting involving social pressure and risk. Two hundred sixty-one undergraduate students provided assessments of consequences associated with illegally consuming alcohol in different environments with differing degrees of risk. In addition, size of the social group was varied as three, four, or nine. In order to determine the moderating effects, if any, of susceptibility to social influence, a measure of socialization was included. Results provide strong support for socialization as an explanation for how individuals interpret risk-related social situations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, we used a fact pattern similar to the John Mark Karr scenario to examine perceptions of DNA and confession evidence. Specifically, we hypothesized that DNA evidence, confessor level of psychopathology, and presence or absence of Miranda protections would affect participants' perceptions of guilt and attitudes towards the interrogation process. One hundred nine undergraduates read a two-page summary based on John Mark Karr's confession. Summaries varied based on psychopathology of confessor, the presence or absence of DNA evidence, and the provision of Miranda warnings prior to confession. The DNA manipulation explained participants' attitudes towards specific aspects of the interrogation process. The importance of perceptions of forensic type evidence, specifically DNA, in our legal system is discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]