Comparing the effectiveness of Henderson instructions and expert testimony: Which safeguard improves jurors’ evaluations of eyewitness evidence?
The New Jersey Supreme Court recently determined that jurors may not be able to effectively evaluate eyewitness evidence on their own. As a result, the Court proposed the use of judicial instructions to assist jurors (called Henderson instructions) and suggested the implementation of these instructi...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Otros Autores: | ; ; |
| Tipo de documento: | Electrónico Artículo |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
2017
|
| En: |
Journal of experimental criminology
Año: 2017, Volumen: 13, Número: 1, Páginas: 29-52 |
| Acceso en línea: |
Volltext (Resolving-System) |
| Journals Online & Print: | Gargar...
|
| Verificar disponibilidad: | HBZ Gateway |
| Palabras clave: |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naa a22000002c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1747976466 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20210210104902.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 210210s2017 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s11292-016-9279-6 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1747976466 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1747976466 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Jones, Angela M. |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Comparing the effectiveness of Henderson instructions and expert testimony |b Which safeguard improves jurors’ evaluations of eyewitness evidence? |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2017 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a The New Jersey Supreme Court recently determined that jurors may not be able to effectively evaluate eyewitness evidence on their own. As a result, the Court proposed the use of judicial instructions to assist jurors (called Henderson instructions) and suggested the implementation of these instructions would reduce the need for expert testimony. We tested the efficacy of these instructions compared to alternative instructions and expert testimony. | ||
| 700 | 1 | |a Penrod, Steven |e VerfasserIn |0 (DE-588)1219990167 |0 (DE-627)1736139282 |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bergold, Amanda N. |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Dillon, Marlee Kind |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of experimental criminology |d Berlin : Springer Science + Business Media B.V., 2005 |g 13(2017), 1, Seite 29-52 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)482305967 |w (DE-600)2181946-4 |w (DE-576)117649015 |x 1572-8315 |7 nnas |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:13 |g year:2017 |g number:1 |g pages:29-52 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11292-016-9279-6 |x Resolving-System |3 Volltext |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 3850926176 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1747976466 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20210210104902 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 210210||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-21-110 |c DE-627 |d DE-21-110 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 689 |a s |a Expert testimony | ||
| LOK | |0 689 |a s |a Judicial instructions | ||
| LOK | |0 689 |a s |a Juror decision making | ||
| LOK | |0 689 |a s |a Eyewitness identification | ||
| LOK | |0 689 |a s |a New Jersey Supreme Court | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-21-110 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a krub |a krzo | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw | ||