Referencias

• Arce, R. (1989). Perfiles psicosociales, veredictos y deliberación en Jurados legos. Tesis Doctoral. Universidad de Santiago de Compostela.
   Google Scholar
• Arce, R. y Fariña, F. (1995). El estudio del jurado: Capacitación psicológica, selección y representatividad. En M. Clemente (Ed.), Fundamentos de la Psicología Jurídica. Madrid: Pirámide.
   Google Scholar
• Arce, R., Fariña, F., Vila, C. y Real, S. (1994). Jury selection procedures. A new approach. XXIIIth International Congress of IAAP, Madrid.
   Google Scholar
• Arce, R., Sobral, J., y Fariña, F. (1990). Attribution and deliberation style. 2nd European Conference on Law and Psychology, Nürnberg.
   Google Scholar
• Babcock, B. (1975). Voir dire: Preserving ‘ist wonderfull power’. Stanford Law Review, 27, 545–565.
   Google Scholar
• Bem, D.J. y Allen, A. (1974). On predicting some of the people some of the time: The search for cross-situational consistencies in behavior. Psychological Review, 81, 506–520.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg, K.S. y Vidmar, N. (1975). Authoritarism and recall of evidence about criminal behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 9, 147–157.
   Google Scholar
• Boehm, V. (1968). Mr. Prejudice, Miss Symphaty and the authoritarian personality: An application of psychological measurement to the problem of jury bias. Wiscosin Law Review, 734–750.
   Google Scholar
• Bray, R. y Noble, A. (1978). Authoritarianism and decisions of mock juries: Evidence of jury bias and group polarization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1424–1430.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broeder, D. (1965). Voir dire examination: An empirical study. Southern California Law Review, 38, 503–528.
   Google Scholar
• Buckhout, R. (1973). Jury without peers (CR-2). Brooklyn: Center for Responsive Psychology.
   Google Scholar
• Buckhout, R., Alexander, M., Gambardella, J., Eugenio, P. y Kakoullis, B. (1979). Discretion in jury selection. En L.E. Abt y R. Stuart (eds.), Social Psychology and discretionary law. Nueva York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
   Google Scholar
• Dane, F. y Wrighstman, L. (1982). Effects of defendants' and victims' characteristics on jurors' verdicts. En N.L. Kerr y R.M. Bray (Eds.), The psychology of the courtroom. Nueva York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Feild, H.S. (1978). Juror background characteristics and attitudes toward rape: Correlates of jurors' decisions in rape trials. Law and Human Behavior, 2, 73–93.
   Google Scholar
• Hamilton, V.L. (1978). Obedience and responsability: A jury simulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 126–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hastie, R., Penrod, S. y Pennnington, N. (1983). Inside the Jury. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press
   Google Scholar
• Hepburn, J.R. (1980). The objetive reality of evidence and the utility of systematic jury selection. Law and Human Behavior, 4, 89–102.
   Google Scholar
• Hewstone, M. y Antaki, Ch. (1990). La teoría de la atribución y explicaciones sociales. En M. Hewstone, W. Stroebe, J.P. Codol y G.M. Stephenson (1990), Introducción a la psicología social. Barcelona: Ariel.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, L.R. (1965). Group problem solving. En L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. Nueva York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jurrow, G.L. (1971). New data on the effect of a «death qualified» jury on the guilt determination process. Harvard Law Review, 84, 567–611.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan, M.F. (1979). A model of cognitive processes in jurors. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 10, 48–60.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan, M. (1989). Factores psicológicos en la conducta de jurados. En A. Garzón (Ed.), Psicología y justicia. Valencia: Promolibro.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan, M.F. y Miller, J.H. (1978). Reducing the effects of juror bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1443–1455.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kauffman, R.A. y Ryckman, R.M. (1979). Effects of locus-of-control, outcome severity and attitudinal similarity of defendant on attributions of criminal responsibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 340–343.
   Google Scholar
• Kerr, N.L., Atkin, R.S., Stasser, G., Meek, D., Holt, R.V. y Davis, J.H. (1976). Guilt beyond a reazonable doubt: Effects of concept definition and assigned decision rule on the jugdments of mock juries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34 (2), 282–294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lempert, R.O. (1975). Civil juries and complex cases: Let's not rush to judgment. Michigan Law Review, 80, 68–132.
   Google Scholar
• Levenson, H. (1981). Differentiating among internality, powerfull, others and change. En H.M. Lefcourt (Ed.), Research with the locus of control construct. Vol. 1: Assessment methods. Nueva York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Malton, R.J. y Davis, J.W. (1986). Factors affecting jury decision-making. Social Action and the Law, 12 (2), 41–48.
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, H.E. (1972). Authoritarian punitiveness in simulated jurors decision-making: The good guys don't always wear white hats. Manuscrito presentado al Meeting de la Midwestern Psychlogical Association, Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Penrod, S. (1980). Evaluating social scientific methods of jury selection. Meeting of Midwestern Association, St. Louis.
   Google Scholar
• Penrod, S. (1990). Predictors of jury decision making in criminal and civil cases: A field experiment. Forensic Reports, 3 (3), 261–277.
   Google Scholar
• Penrod, S. y Hastie, R. (1983). Individual differences among jurors. En R. Hastie, S. Penrod y N. Pennington (Eds.), Inside the jury. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Phares, E. y Wilson, K. (1972). Responsability attribution: Role of outcome severity, situational ambiguity, and internal-external control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 392–496.
   Google Scholar
• Reuterman, N.A. (1975). A measure of attitudes toward juvenile delinquency. Manuscrito no Publicado. Delinquency Study Center. Southern Illinois University, Illinois.
   Google Scholar
• Rokeach, M. (1960). The open and closed mind. Nueva York: Basic Book Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Rumsey, M.G. y Rumsey, J.M. (1977). A case of rape: Sentencing judgments of males and females. Psychological Reports, 41, 459–465.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sáinz, E. y Sáinz, J. (1989). Estrat&egias de decisión de un jurado bajo condiciones de simulación. Revista de Psicología General y Aplicada, 42 (4), 509–523.
   Google Scholar
• Saks, M.J. (1977). Jury verdicts. Lexington, Mass.: Heath.
   Google Scholar
• Saks, M.J. y Hastie, R. (1986). Social psychology in court. Malabar, Florida: Robert Krieger Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Scroggs, J.R. (1976). Penalties of rapes as a function of victim provocativeess, damage and resistance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 6, 360–368.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schachter, S. (1951). Deviation, rejection and communication. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46, 190–207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sobral, J., Arce, R. y Fariña, F. (1989). Aspectos psicosociales de las decisiones judiciales. Revisión y lectura diferenciada. Boletín de Psicología, 25, 25–74.
   Google Scholar
• Sosis, R. (1974). Internal-external control and the perception of responsability and another for an accident. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 393–399.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanford, S. y Penrod, S. (1986). Jury deliberations: Discussion content and the influence processes in Jury decision making. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16 (4), 322–347.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stasser, G. (1977). A model of social influence during group discussion: An application with four- and six-person mock juries. Disertación doctoral no publicada. Universidad de Illinois.
   Google Scholar
• Vandyke, J.M. (1977). Jury selection procedures. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Vidmar, N. (1979). The other issues in jury simulation research: A commentary with particular reference to defendant character studies. Law and Human Behavior, 3, 95–106.
   Google Scholar
• Vidmar, N. y Crinklaw, L. (1973). Retribution and utility as motives of sanctioning behavior. Comunicación presentada a la Midwestern Psychological Association Convention, Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, G.D. (1973). The Psychology of conservatism. Nueva York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zeisel, H. (1971)…. and then there was none: The diminution of federal jury. University of Chicago Law Review, 35, 228–241.
   Google Scholar