Doctoral Dissertation Research: Cognitive Depletion and Motivation to Avoid Prejudice during Jury Deliberation: A Self-Regulation Perspective on Interracial Group Decision-Making

博士论文研究：陪审团审议过程中的认知损耗和避免偏见的动机：跨种族群体决策的自我调节视角

• 批准号: 1535406
• 负责人: Bette Bottoms
• 金额: $ 2.67万
• 依托单位: University of Illinois at Chicago
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2015
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2015-08-15 至 2016-12-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1535406&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Doctoral; Dissertation; Research; Cognitive; Depletion

Increased diversity in juries ensures representation of ethnic minority voices, but racial diversity presents unique challenges to group deliberations. People find it difficult to interact with people from other racial groups, because they are concerned with appearing prejudiced or with experiencing prejudice from others. People often perform worse on memory and decision tasks after they interact with people of a different ethnicity, because of regulatory depletion -- a decrease in people's ability to control their thoughts, behaviors, and emotions. The more people try to regulate some aspects of their behavior (e.g., expressions of prejudice), the less able they are to regulate other aspects (e.g., focus on the evidence). Yet studies show that, when White jurors deliberate with minority (versus only White) jurors to judge a minority defendant, they actually remember more case facts and are more accurate. This study will test the effects of interracial deliberations and defendant race (i.e., White or African-American) on jurors' cognitive performance and motivation to reach a fair verdict, guided by the hypothesis that jurors' motivation to avoid racial prejudice in verdicts encourages them to perform their duty as jurors well even when the social interactions are depleting. Such research, which increases understanding of the interpersonal and cognitive processes at the heart of jury deliberations, can inform courts, policy makers, and the public, and better explain jurors' verdict decisions and inform court practices. Results can be used to influence policy recommendations about how to maximize the benefits of diversity by reducing depletion in the jury room.Specifically, the proposed experimental research relies on social psychological theories of self-regulation to test a model of group deliberation processes to investigate the effects of ethnic diversity on jury decisions. The strength model of self regulation states that people have limited abilities to regulate their behavior, thoughts, and emotions; therefore, regulatory efforts result in cognitive depletion and diminished performance. Using a self-regulation perspective, the proposed research promises to reconcile two sets of contradictory findings: (a) people are depleted after interacting with individuals from other racial groups (Richeson & Shelton, 2003; Richeson & Trawalter, 2005); (b) mixed-race juries are less racially biased and more thoughtful than all-White juries when they judge an African-American defendant (Bowers, Steiner, & Sandys, 2001; Sommers, 2006). What explains this discrepancy? The present project tests several hypotheses: (a) interracial deliberations are more depleting than racially homogeneous ones; (b) White jurors will be particularly depleted when they have to judge an African American defendant in the presence of African American jurors; but (c) White jurors' motivation to avoid being prejudiced against an African-American defendant (particularly when they deliberate with African-American jurors) would overcome their depletion and ensure they perform their jury task well. In a mock jury deliberation paradigm, juries will include 4 participants and either 2 White or 2 African American confederates, resulting in all-White or mixed juries. Jurors will view evidence from a trial in which the defendant will be presented as either White or African American. Jurors will be instructed about the law, then render individual verdicts, deliberate to reach consensus, and complete measures of regulatory depletion (i.e., Stroop test), memory, motivation to reach a fair verdict, implicit and explicit motivation to avoid prejudice, and impressions of other jurors. Videotaped deliberations will be coded to investigate jurors' focus on evidence and valuable contributions as a function of jury composition and defendant race.

陪审团的多样性增加可确保代表少数民族的声音，但种族多样性为团体审议带来了独特的挑战。人们发现很难与其他种族群体的人互动，因为他们关心看起来有偏见或经历其他人的偏见。人们与不同种族的人互动后，在记忆和决策任务上的表现较差，这是由于监管耗尽而降低了人们控制自己的思想，行为和情感的能力。越多的人试图调节其行为的某些方面（例如，偏见的表达），他们对其他方面的能力越少）（例如，关注证据）。 然而，研究表明，当白人陪审员与少数派（与只有白人）审判少数派被告时，他们实际上记得更多的案件事实，并且更准确。这项研究将测试异族审议和被告种族（即白人或非裔美国人）对陪审员的认知表现和动机的影响，以达到公平的判决，这是在陪审员避免种族偏见的动机中的动机的指导下，即使他们在社交互动中履行陪审员的义务，甚至会消除社交活动。这项研究可以增加对陪审团审议核心的人际交往和认知过程的了解，可以为法院，政策制定者和公众提供信息，并更好地解释陪审员的判决决定并为法院的做法提供信息。结果可用于影响政策建议，以减少陪审团的耗尽来最大程度地提高多样性的益处。特别是，拟议的实验研究依赖于自我调节的社会心理学理论来测试团体审议过程的模型，以研究陪审团的影响。自我调节的力量模型指出，人们的行为，思想和情感的能力有限。因此，监管工作导致认知耗竭和绩效下降。拟议的研究使用自我调节的观点有望调和两组矛盾的发现：（a）与其他种族群体的个人互动后，人们会耗尽（Richeson＆Shelton，2003； Richeson＆Trawalter，2005）； （b）当他们评判非裔美国人被告时，混合竞赛陪审团的种族偏见和周到不多（Bowers，Steiner和Sandys，2001； Sommers，2006）。是什么解释了这种差异？本项目检验了几个假设：（a）异族审议比种族均匀的审议更为枯竭； （b）白人陪审员在非洲裔美国陪审员在场时必须判断非裔美国人被告时，他们将特别耗尽；但是（c）白人陪审员避免对非裔美国人被告偏见的动机（尤其是在与非裔美国人陪审员进行故意的情况下）会克服枯竭并确保他们良好执行陪审团任务。在模拟陪审团的审议范式中，陪审团将包括4名参与者以及2名白人或2名非裔美国人同盟国，导致全白或混合陪审团。陪审员将从一个审判中查看证据，该审判将被告作为白人或非裔美国人。将指示陪审员有关法律的指示，然后做出个人判决，故意达成共识，并完全衡量监管耗竭（即Stroop测试），记忆力，动机，以公正的判决，内隐和明确的动机，避免偏见和其他陪审员的印象。录像的审议将进行编码，以调查陪审员对证据和宝贵贡献的关注，这是陪审团组成和被告种族的函数。