The effects of victim testimony order and judicial education on juror decision-making in trials for rape

References

• Axelrod, R. (1973). Schema theory: An information processing model of perception and cognition. American Political Science Review, 67(4), 1248–1266. https://doi.org/10.2307/1956546
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baker, L. (1978). Processing temporal relationships in simple stories: Effects of input sequence. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17(5), 559–572. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(78)90337-7
   Google Scholar
• Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bohner, G., Eyssel, F., Pina, A., Siebler, F., & Viki, G. T. (2009). Rape myth acceptance: Cognitive, affective and behavioural effects of beliefs that blame the victim and exonerate the perpetrator. In M. Horvath, & J. Brown (Eds.), Rape: Challenging contemporary thinking (pp. 17–45). Willan Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Bollingmo, G., Wessel, E., Sandvold, Y., Eilertsen, D. E., & Magnussen, S. (2009). The effect of biased and non-biased information on judgments of witness credibility. Psychology, Crime & Law, 15(1), 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160802131107
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bongiorno, R., McKimmie, B. M., & Masser, B. M. (2016). The selective use of rape-victim stereotypes to protect culturally similar perpetrators. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(3), 398–413. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684316631932
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bornstein, B. H., Golding, J. M., Neuschatz, J., Kimbrough, C., Reed, K., Magyarics, C., & Luecht, K. (2017). Mock juror sampling issues in jury simulation research: A meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 41(1), 13–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000223
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bracher, M. (2012). Schema criticism: Literature, cognitive science, and social change. College Literature, 39(4), 84–117. https://doi.org/10.1353/lit.2012.0044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewer, W. E., & Nakamura, G. V. (1984). The nature and functions of schemas. In R. S. Wyer Jr, & T. K. Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (pp. 119–160). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Brünken, R., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2004). Assessment of cognitive load in multimedia learning with dual-task methodology: Auditory load and modality effects. Instructional Science, 32(1-2), 115–132. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021812.96911.c5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buckles, T. (2007). Crime scene investigation, criminalistics, and the law. Thomson Delmar Learning.
   Google Scholar
• Burgess, A. W., & Carretta, C. M. (2016). Rape and its impact on the victim. In R. R. Hazelwood, & A. W. Burgess (Eds.), Practical aspects of rape investigation: A multidisciplinary approach (pp. 3–18). Taylor and Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Burgin, R., & Flynn, A. (2021). Women’s behavior as implied consent: Male “reasonableness” in Australian rape law. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 21(3), 334–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895819880953
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burnett, A., & Badzinski, D. M. (2000). An exploratory study of argument in the jury decision-making process. Communication Quarterly, 48(4), 380–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463370009385605
   Google Scholar
• Burns, M. D., & Granz, E. L. (2021). Confronting sexism: Promoting confrontation acceptance and reducing stereotyping through stereotype framing. Sex Roles, 84(9-10), 503–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01183-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burt, M. R. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(2), 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.2.217
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne, G. (2022). Helping jurors to understand: Misconceptions about delay in making a complaint. Alternative Law Journal, 47(1), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1037969X211052707
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarkson, J. J., Tormala, Z. L., & Rucker, D. D. (2008). A new look at the consequences of attitude certainty: The amplification hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(4), 810–825. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013192
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook, N. K., & Messman-Moore, T. L. (2018). I said no: The impact of voicing non-consent on women’s perceptions of and responses to rape. Violence Against Women, 24(5), 507–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801217708059
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cossins, A. (2020). Closing the justice gap for adult and child sexual assault: Rethinking the adversarial trial. Springer Nature.
   Google Scholar
• Coutinho, E., & Cangelosi, A. (2011). Musical emotions: Predicting second-by-second subjective feelings of emotion from low-level psychoacoustic features and physiological measurements. Emotion, 11(4), 921–937. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024700
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cowan, R. (2021). Asking for it. How rape myths can prejudice trials and potential solutions. In R. Killean, E. Dowds, & A. McAlinden (Eds.), Sexual violence on trial (pp. 85–96). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Daly, K., & Bouhours, B. (2010). Rape and attrition in the legal process: A comparative analysis of five countries. Crime and Justice, 39(1), 565–650. https://doi.org/10.1086/653101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeGue, S., DiLillo, D., & Scalora, M. (2010). Are all perpetrators alike? Comparing risk factors for sexual coercion and aggression. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 22(4), 402–426. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063210372140
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DePaulo, B. M., Lindsay, J. J., Malone, B. E., Muhlenbruck, L., Charlton, K., & Cooper, H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 74–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.74
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Devine, D. J. (2012). Jury decision making: The state of the science. New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Diamond, S. S. (1997). Illuminations and shadows from jury simulations. Law and Human Behavior, 21(5), 561–571. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024831908377
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dowds, E. (2019). Towards a contextual definition of rape: Consent, coercion and constructive force. The Modern Law Review, 83(1), 35–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12461
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duncanson, K., & Henderson, E. (2014). Narrative, theatre, and the disruptive potential of jury directions in rape trials. Feminist Legal Studies, 22(2), 155–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-014-9264-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, K. M., Probst, D. R., Tansill, E. C., Dixon, K. J., Bennett, S., & Gidycz, C. A. (2014). In their own words: A content-analytic study of college women’s resistance to sexual assault. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29(14), 2527–2547. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260513520470
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellison, L. (2019). Credibility in context: Jury education and intimate partner rape. The International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 23(3), 263–281. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365712718807225
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellison, L., & Munro, V. E. (2009). Turning mirrors into windows?: Assessing the impact of (mock) juror education in rape trials. British Journal of Criminology, 49(3), 363–383. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azp013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellison, L., & Munro, V. E. (2013). Better the devil you know? ‘Real rape’ stereotypes and the relevance of a previous relationship in (mock) juror deliberations. The International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 17(4), 299–322. https://doi.org/10.1350/ijep.2013.17.4.433
   Google Scholar
• Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fein, S., Hoshino-Browne, E., Davies, P. G., & Spencer, S. J. (2003). The role of self-image maintenance in stereotype activation and application. In S. J. Spencer, S. Fein, M. P. Zanna, & J. M. Olson (Eds.), Motivated social perception: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 9, pp. 21–44). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Flack, W. F., Daubman, K. A., Caron, M. L., Asadorian, J. A., D’Aureli, N. R., Gigliotti, S. N., Hall, A. T., Kiser, S., & Stine, E. R. (2007). Risk factors and consequences of unwanted sex among university students: Hooking up, alcohol, and stress response. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22(2), 139–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260506295354
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert, L., Sarvet, A. L., Wall, M., Walsh, K., Reardon, L., Wilson, P., Santelli, J., Khan, S., Thompson, M., Hirsch, J. S., & Mellins, C. A. (2019). Situational contexts and risk factors associated with incapacitated and nonincapacitated sexual assaults among college women. Journal of Women’s Health, 28(2), 185–193. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2018.7191
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillen, J. (2019). Report into the law and procedures in serious sexual offences in Northern Ireland. Department of Justice. https://www.justice-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/justice/gillen-report-may-2019.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Giner-Sorolla, R., Aberson, C. L., Bostyn, D. H., Carpenter, T., Conrique, B. G., Lewis, N. A., & Soderberg, C. (2019). Power to detect what? Considerations for planning and evaluating sample size. https://osf.io/d3v8t/.
   Google Scholar
• Golding, J. M., Lynch, K. R., & Wasarhaley, N. E. (2016). Impeaching rape victims in criminal court: Does concurrent civil action hurt justice? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31(19), 3129–3149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260515584342
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodman-Delahunty, J., Cossins, A., & O’Brien, K. (2010). Enhancing the credibility of complainants in child sexual assault trials: The effect of expert evidence and judicial directions. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 28(6), 769–783. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.936
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodman-Delahunty, J., Cossins, A., & O’Brien, K. (2011). A comparison of expert evidence and judicial directions to counter misconceptions in child sexual abuse trials. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 44(2), 196–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004865811405140
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (1985). A valid procedure for obtaining self-report of affect in marital interaction. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53(2), 151–160. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.53.2.151
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holbrook, A. L., & Krosnick, J. A. (2010). Operative and meta-attitudinal manifestations of attitude accessibility: Two different constructs, not two measures of the same construct. In J. P. Forgas, J. Cooper, & W. D. Crano (Eds.), The psychology of attitudes and attitude change (pp. 109–124). Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Judicial Studies Board. (2010). Crown court benchbook.
   Google Scholar
• Kapardis, A. (2014). Psychology and law: A critical introduction. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kleider-Offutt, H. M., Clevinger, A. M., & Bond, A. D. (2016). Working memory and cognitive load in the legal system: Influences on police shooting decisions, interrogation and jury decisions. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 5(4), 426–433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2016.04.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koehler, J. J., & Meixner, J. B. Jr. (2017). Jury simulation goals. In M. B. Kovera (Ed.), The psychology of juries (pp. 161–183). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000026-008
   Google Scholar
• Krahé, B. (2016). Societal responses to sexual violence against women: Rape myths and the “real rape” stereotype. In H. Kury, S. Redo, & E. Shea (Eds.), Women and children as victims and offenders: Background, prevention, reintegration (pp. 671–700). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08398-8_24
   Google Scholar
• Krahé, B., Bieneck, S., & Scheinberger-Olwig, R. (2007). Adolescents’ sexual scripts: Schematic representations of consensual and nonconsensual heterosexual interactions. Journal of Sex Research, 44(4), 316–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490701580923
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunda, Z., & Spencer, S. J. (2003). When do stereotypes come to mind and when do they color judgment? A goal-based theoretical framework for stereotype activation and application. Psychological Bulletin, 129(4), 522–544. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.522
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunda, Z., & Thagard, P. (1996). Forming impressions from stereotypes, traits, and behaviors: A parallel-constraint-satisfaction theory. Psychological Review, 103(2), 284–308. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.2.284
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leahy, S. (2014). Bad laws or bad attitudes? Assessing the impact of societal attitudes upon the conviction rate for rape in Ireland. Irish Journal of Applied Social Studies, 14(1), 18–29. https://doi.org/10.21427/D7ZD9F
   Google Scholar
• Lee, H. D. H., McKimmie, B. M., Masser, B. M., & Tangen, J. M. (2021). Guided by the rape schema: The influence of event order on how jurors evaluate the victim’s testimony in cases of rape. Psychology, Crime & Law, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2021.1984483
   Google Scholar
• Lee, H. D. H., Tangen, J. M., McKimmie, B. M., & Masser, B. M. (2022). The influence of event order on the narratives jurors construct and tell in cases of rape. Manuscript under review.
   Google Scholar
• Levett, L. M., & Devine, D. (2017). Integrating individual and group models of juror decision making. In M. B. Kovera (Ed.), The psychology of juries (pp. 11–36). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000026-002
   Google Scholar
• Lippert, A., Golding, J., Lynch, K., & Haak, E. (2018). When a corporation rapes: Perceptions of rape in civil court for corporate defendants. Psychology, Crime & Law, 24(7), 703–726. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2017.1421185
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Littleton, H., Tabernik, H., Canales, E. J., & Backstrom, T. (2009). Risky situation or harmless fun? A qualitative examination of college women’s bad hook-up and rape scripts. Sex Roles, 60(11-12), 793–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9586-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Littleton, H. L., & Axsom, D. (2003). Rape and seduction scripts of university students: Implications for rape attributions and unacknowledged rape. Sex Roles, 49(9-10), 465–475. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025824505185
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Littleton, H. L., Axsom, D., & Yoder, M. (2006). Priming of consensual and nonconsensual sexual scripts: An experimental test of the role of scripts in rape attributions. Sex Roles, 54(7-8), 557–563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9017-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Littleton, H. L., & Dodd, J. C. (2016). Violent attacks and damaged victims: An exploration of the rape scripts of European American and African American U.S. college women. Violence Against Women, 22(14), 1725–1747. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801216631438
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lonsway, K. A., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1994). Rape myths: In review. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18(2), 133–164. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb00448.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorenz, K., & Ullman, S. E. (2016). Alcohol and sexual assault victimization: Research findings and future directions. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 31, 82–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2016.08.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. (2000). Equivalence of the mediation, confounding and suppression effect. Prevention Science, 1(4), 173–181. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026595011371
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Macrae, C. N., Milne, A. B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (1994). Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: A peek inside the cognitive toolbox. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(1), 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.1.37
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maddison, D., Tonking, S., Wait, H., & Ormerod, D. (2017). Crown court compendium part 1 jury and trial management and summing up 2017. Judicial College.
   Google Scholar
• Masser, B., Lee, K., & McKimmie, B. M. (2010). Bad woman, bad victim? Disentangling the effects of victim stereotypicality, gender stereotypicality and benevolent sexism on acquaintance rape victim blame. Sex Roles, 62(7-8), 494–504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9648-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masters, N. T., Casey, E., Wells, E. A., & Morrison, D. M. (2013). Sexual scripts among young heterosexually active men and women: Continuity and change. The Journal of Sex Research, 50(5), 409–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2012.661102
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, E., Benton-Greig, P., Dickson, S., & Souness, R. (2020). Rape myths as barriers to fair trail process. Canterbury University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McGuire, W. J. (1968). Personality and attitude change: An information-processing theory. In A. G. Greenwald, T. C. Brock, & T. M. Ostrom (Eds.), Psychological foundations of attitudes (pp. 171–196). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• McKimmie, B. M., Antrobus, E., & Baguley, C. (2014a). Objective and subjective comprehension of jury instructions in criminal trials. New Criminal Law Review, 17(2), 163–183. https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2014.17.2.163
   Google Scholar
• McKimmie, B. M., & Masser, B. M. (2010). The effect of gender in the courtroom. In J. R. Adler, & J. M. Gray (Eds.), Forensic psychology: Concepts, debates and practice (2nd ed., pp. 95–122). Willan.
   Google Scholar
• McKimmie, B. M., Masser, B. M., & Bongiorno, R. (2014b). What counts as rape? The effect of offense prototypes, victim stereotypes, and participant gender on how the complainant and defendant are perceived. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29(12), 2273–2303. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260513518843
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKimmie, B. M., Masser, B. M., Nitschke, F., Lee, H., & Schuller, R. A. (2020). The impact of schemas on decision-making in cases involving allegations of sexual violence. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 32(4), 420–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/10345329.2020.1829780
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Millar, M. G., & Tesser, A. (1986). Thought-induced attitude change: The effects of schema structure and commitment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(2), 259–269. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.2.259
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, M. K. (2020). Judgments about sexual assault vary depending on whether an affirmative consent policy or a “no means no” policy is applied. Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research, 12(3), 163–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/JACPR-03-2020-0485
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nitschke, F. T., Masser, B. M., McKimmie, B. M., & Riachi, M. (2021). Intoxicated but not incapacitated: Are there effective methods to assist juries in interpreting evidence of voluntary complainant intoxication in cases of rape? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(9-10), 4335–4359. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518790601
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1988). Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14(3), 521–533. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.14.3.521
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(2), 189–206. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.189
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1993). The story model for juror decision making. In R. Hastie (Ed.), Inside the juror: The psychology of juror decision making (pp. 192–221). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, J. T. E. (2011). Eta squared and partial eta squared as measures of effect size in educational research. Educational Research Review, 6(2), 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2010.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rucker, D. D., Tormala, Z. L., Petty, R. E., & Briñol, P. (2014). Consumer conviction and commitment: An appraisal-based framework for attitude certainty. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(1), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2013.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive psychology, linguistics, artificial intelligence, and education (pp. 33–58). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan, K. M. (1988). Rape and seduction scripts. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 12(2), 237–245. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1988.tb00939.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuller, R. A., McKimmie, B. M., Masser, B. M., & Klippenstine, M. A. (2010). Judgments of sexual assault: The impact of complainant emotional demeanor, gender and victim stereotypes. New Criminal Law Review, 13(4), 759–780. https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2010.13.4.759
   Google Scholar
• Sexual Offences Act. (2003). (UK) s. 1.
   Google Scholar
• Sherman, J. W., Macrae, C. N., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2000). Attention and stereotyping: Cognitive constraints on the construction of meaningful social impressions. European Review of Social Psychology, 11(1), 145–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792772043000022
   Google Scholar
• Sivasubramaniam, D. (2017). The justice motive: Psychological research on perceptions of justice in criminal law. In R. Levy (Ed.), New directions for law in Australia: Essays in contemporary law reform (pp. 147–153). ANU Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, O. (2019). Narratives, credibility and adversarial justice in English and Welsh rape trials. In U. Andersson, M. Edgren, L. Karlsson, & G. Nilsson (Eds.), Rape narratives in motion. Palgrave studies in crime, media and culture (pp. 71–99). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13852-3_4
   Google Scholar
• Smith, O., & Skinner, T. (2017). How rape myths are used and challenged in rape and sexual assault trials. Social & Legal Studies, 26(4), 441–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663916680130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Srivastava, N., Velloso, E., Lodge, J. M., Erfani, S., & Bailey, J. (2019). Continuous evaluation of video lectures from real-time difficulty self-report. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–12). https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300816.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, T. L., Whiteside, S. P., & Golding, J. M. (2000). The effectiveness of expert witnesses in civil trials involving repressed memories of sexual assault. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 18(4), 27–62. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2000-16075-002.
   Google Scholar
• Stone, V. A. (1969). A primacy effect in decision-making by jurors. Journal of Communication, 19(3), 239–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1969.tb00846.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stuart, S. M., McKimmie, B. M., & Masser, B. M. (2019). Rape perpetrators on trial: The effect of sexual assault–related schemas on attributions of blame. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34(2), 310–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260516640777
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Studebaker, C. A. (2017). Integrating concepts of trial advocacy into juror decision-making research. In M. B. Kovera (Ed.), The psychology of juries (pp. 59–82). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000026-004.
   Google Scholar
• Suarez, E., & Gadalla, T. M. (2010). Stop blaming the victim: A meta-analysis on rape myths. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(11), 2010–2035. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260509354503
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, N., & Joudo, J. (2005). The impact of pre-recorded video and closed circuit television testimony by adult sexual assault complainants on jury decision-making: An experimental study. Australian Institute of Criminology. https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2005-12/apo-nid2236.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Temkin, J., Gray, J. M., & Barrett, J. (2018). Different functions of rape myth use in court: Findings from a trial observation study. Feminist Criminology, 13(2), 205–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085116661627
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tesser, A., & Leone, C. (1977). Cognitive schemas and thought as determinants of attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(4), 340–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(77)90004-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waters, N. L., & Hans, V. P. (2009). A jury of one: Opinion formation, conformity, and dissent on juries. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 6(3), 513–540. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2009.01152.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westera, N. J., McKimmie, B. M., Kebbell, M. R., Milne, R., & Masser, B. (2015). Does the narrative style of video evidence influence judgements about rape complainant testimony? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 29(5), 637–646. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3146
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, K. D., & Jones, A. (2005). Trial strategy and tactics. In N. Brewer, & K. D. Williams (Eds.), Psychology and law: An empirical perspective (pp. 276–321). Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Witmer-Rich, J. (2016). Unpacking affirmative consent: Not as great as you hope, not as bad as you fear. Texas Tech Law Review, 49(1), 57–88.
   Google Scholar
• Yuviler-Gavish, N., Yechiam, E., & Kallai, A. (2011). Learning in multimodal training: Visual guidance can be both appealing and disadvantageous in spatial tasks. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 69(3), 113–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2010.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar