Law and order effects: on cognitive dissonance and belief perseverance

Enide Maegherman; Karl Ask; Robert Horselenberg; Peter J. van Koppen

doi:10.1080/13218719.2020.1855268

Law and order effects: on cognitive dissonance and belief perseverance

Enide Maegherman^*
, Karl Ask
, Robert Horselenberg
, Peter J. van Koppen

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to Journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

Order of evidence presentation affects the evaluation and the integration of evidence in mock criminal cases. In this study, we aimed to determine whether the order in which incriminating and exonerating evidence is presented influences cognitive dissonance and subsequent display of confirmation bias. Law students (N = 407) were presented with a murder case vignette, followed by incriminating and exonerating evidence in various orders. Contrary to a predicted primacy effect (i.e. early evidence being most influential), a recency effect (i.e. late evidence being most influential) was observed in ratings of likelihood of the suspect’s guilt. The cognitive dissonance ratings and conviction rates were not affected by the order of evidence presentation. The effects of evidence presentation order may be limited to specific aspects of legal decisions. However, there is a need to replicate the results using procedures and samples that are more representative of real-life criminal law trials.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	33-52
Number of pages	20
Journal	Psychiatry, Psychology and Law
Volume	29
Issue number	1
Early online date	29 Jan 2021
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2020.1855268
Publication status	Published - 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This research is supported by a fellowship awarded from the Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate Program The House of Legal Psychology (EMJD-LP) with Framework Partnership Agreement (FPA) 2013-0036 and Specific Grant Agreement (SGA) 532473-EM-5-2017-1-NL-ERA MUNDUS-EPJD. We would like to thank Paulien van Rymenant for her help with data collection.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Funding

This research is supported by a fellowship awarded from the Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate Program The House of Legal Psychology (EMJD-LP) with Framework Partnership Agreement (FPA) 2013-0036 and Specific Grant Agreement (SGA) 532473-EM-5-2017-1-NL-ERA MUNDUS-EPJD. We would like to thank Paulien van Rymenant for her help with data collection.

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

Keywords

cognitive dissonance
confirmation bias
criminal law
evidence
judges
legal decision-making
legal psychology
order effects

Access to Document

10.1080/13218719.2020.1855268

Persistent URL (handle)

Persistent link

Cite this

@article{5b6a924f7f4346f18ec0a87c9c42faa4,

title = "Law and order effects: on cognitive dissonance and belief perseverance",

abstract = "Order of evidence presentation affects the evaluation and the integration of evidence in mock criminal cases. In this study, we aimed to determine whether the order in which incriminating and exonerating evidence is presented influences cognitive dissonance and subsequent display of confirmation bias. Law students (N = 407) were presented with a murder case vignette, followed by incriminating and exonerating evidence in various orders. Contrary to a predicted primacy effect (i.e. early evidence being most influential), a recency effect (i.e. late evidence being most influential) was observed in ratings of likelihood of the suspect{\textquoteright}s guilt. The cognitive dissonance ratings and conviction rates were not affected by the order of evidence presentation. The effects of evidence presentation order may be limited to specific aspects of legal decisions. However, there is a need to replicate the results using procedures and samples that are more representative of real-life criminal law trials.",

keywords = "cognitive dissonance, confirmation bias, criminal law, evidence, judges, legal decision-making, legal psychology, order effects",

author = "Enide Maegherman and Karl Ask and Robert Horselenberg and \{van Koppen\}, \{Peter J.\}",

note = "Funding Information: This research is supported by a fellowship awarded from the Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate Program The House of Legal Psychology (EMJD-LP) with Framework Partnership Agreement (FPA) 2013-0036 and Specific Grant Agreement (SGA) 532473-EM-5-2017-1-NL-ERA MUNDUS-EPJD. We would like to thank Paulien van Rymenant for her help with data collection. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor \& Francis Group.",

year = "2022",

doi = "10.1080/13218719.2020.1855268",

language = "English",

volume = "29",

pages = "33--52",

journal = "Psychiatry, Psychology and Law",

issn = "1321-8719",

publisher = "Routledge",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Law and order effects: on cognitive dissonance and belief perseverance

AU - Maegherman, Enide

AU - Ask, Karl

AU - Horselenberg, Robert

AU - van Koppen, Peter J.

N1 - Funding Information: This research is supported by a fellowship awarded from the Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate Program The House of Legal Psychology (EMJD-LP) with Framework Partnership Agreement (FPA) 2013-0036 and Specific Grant Agreement (SGA) 532473-EM-5-2017-1-NL-ERA MUNDUS-EPJD. We would like to thank Paulien van Rymenant for her help with data collection. Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

PY - 2022

Y1 - 2022

N2 - Order of evidence presentation affects the evaluation and the integration of evidence in mock criminal cases. In this study, we aimed to determine whether the order in which incriminating and exonerating evidence is presented influences cognitive dissonance and subsequent display of confirmation bias. Law students (N = 407) were presented with a murder case vignette, followed by incriminating and exonerating evidence in various orders. Contrary to a predicted primacy effect (i.e. early evidence being most influential), a recency effect (i.e. late evidence being most influential) was observed in ratings of likelihood of the suspect’s guilt. The cognitive dissonance ratings and conviction rates were not affected by the order of evidence presentation. The effects of evidence presentation order may be limited to specific aspects of legal decisions. However, there is a need to replicate the results using procedures and samples that are more representative of real-life criminal law trials.

AB - Order of evidence presentation affects the evaluation and the integration of evidence in mock criminal cases. In this study, we aimed to determine whether the order in which incriminating and exonerating evidence is presented influences cognitive dissonance and subsequent display of confirmation bias. Law students (N = 407) were presented with a murder case vignette, followed by incriminating and exonerating evidence in various orders. Contrary to a predicted primacy effect (i.e. early evidence being most influential), a recency effect (i.e. late evidence being most influential) was observed in ratings of likelihood of the suspect’s guilt. The cognitive dissonance ratings and conviction rates were not affected by the order of evidence presentation. The effects of evidence presentation order may be limited to specific aspects of legal decisions. However, there is a need to replicate the results using procedures and samples that are more representative of real-life criminal law trials.

KW - cognitive dissonance

KW - confirmation bias

KW - criminal law

KW - evidence

KW - judges

KW - legal decision-making

KW - legal psychology

KW - order effects

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85100117832

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85100117832#tab=citedBy

U2 - 10.1080/13218719.2020.1855268

DO - 10.1080/13218719.2020.1855268

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85100117832

SN - 1321-8719

VL - 29

SP - 33

EP - 52

JO - Psychiatry, Psychology and Law

JF - Psychiatry, Psychology and Law

IS - 1

ER -

Law and order effects: on cognitive dissonance and belief perseverance

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Funding

UN SDGs

Keywords

Access to Document

Persistent URL (handle)

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this