{"title":"关于检察官违反布雷迪规定对被误判为谋杀罪的人免罪信心的影响的实验研究","authors":"John C. Navarro, Michael A. Hansen","doi":"10.1007/s11292-024-09658-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Objectives</h3><p>While several contributing factors can lead to wrongful convictions, it is unclear whether the public perceives these methods of exonerating convicted murderers differently.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>We distributed an online survey to a nationally representative sample of 1193 individuals. After reading a prompt about the increased attention and production of digital media on wrongful convictions and exonerations, respondents were randomized into two conditions to evaluate their confidence in the exoneration of a convicted murderer across four contributing factors. The experimental condition contained the addition of prosecutorial misconduct in withholding evidence.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>Public confidence in wrongful conviction exonerations varied across the four contributing factors, with DNA evidence consistently held in the highest regard. Confidence then followed a descending order, beginning with police-induced forced confessions, false testimonies, and eyewitness statements, with all three showing increased confidence ratings when prosecutorial misconduct was involved.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusions</h3><p>The public distinguishes between contributing factors in murder exonerations. DNA is the most trusted evidence for murder exonerations regardless of misconduct, while confidence in the other contributing factors to exonerate murderers significantly increases when prosecutorial misconduct is present.</p>","PeriodicalId":47684,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Criminology","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An experimental study on the effect of prosecutorial Brady violations on confidence in exonerating individuals wrongfully convicted of murder\",\"authors\":\"John C. Navarro, Michael A. Hansen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11292-024-09658-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Objectives</h3><p>While several contributing factors can lead to wrongful convictions, it is unclear whether the public perceives these methods of exonerating convicted murderers differently.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Methods</h3><p>We distributed an online survey to a nationally representative sample of 1193 individuals. After reading a prompt about the increased attention and production of digital media on wrongful convictions and exonerations, respondents were randomized into two conditions to evaluate their confidence in the exoneration of a convicted murderer across four contributing factors. The experimental condition contained the addition of prosecutorial misconduct in withholding evidence.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Results</h3><p>Public confidence in wrongful conviction exonerations varied across the four contributing factors, with DNA evidence consistently held in the highest regard. Confidence then followed a descending order, beginning with police-induced forced confessions, false testimonies, and eyewitness statements, with all three showing increased confidence ratings when prosecutorial misconduct was involved.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Conclusions</h3><p>The public distinguishes between contributing factors in murder exonerations. DNA is the most trusted evidence for murder exonerations regardless of misconduct, while confidence in the other contributing factors to exonerate murderers significantly increases when prosecutorial misconduct is present.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47684,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Criminology\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Criminology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-024-09658-1\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-024-09658-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
An experimental study on the effect of prosecutorial Brady violations on confidence in exonerating individuals wrongfully convicted of murder
Objectives
While several contributing factors can lead to wrongful convictions, it is unclear whether the public perceives these methods of exonerating convicted murderers differently.
Methods
We distributed an online survey to a nationally representative sample of 1193 individuals. After reading a prompt about the increased attention and production of digital media on wrongful convictions and exonerations, respondents were randomized into two conditions to evaluate their confidence in the exoneration of a convicted murderer across four contributing factors. The experimental condition contained the addition of prosecutorial misconduct in withholding evidence.
Results
Public confidence in wrongful conviction exonerations varied across the four contributing factors, with DNA evidence consistently held in the highest regard. Confidence then followed a descending order, beginning with police-induced forced confessions, false testimonies, and eyewitness statements, with all three showing increased confidence ratings when prosecutorial misconduct was involved.
Conclusions
The public distinguishes between contributing factors in murder exonerations. DNA is the most trusted evidence for murder exonerations regardless of misconduct, while confidence in the other contributing factors to exonerate murderers significantly increases when prosecutorial misconduct is present.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Experimental Criminology focuses on high quality experimental and quasi-experimental research in the advancement of criminological theory and/or the development of evidence based crime and justice policy. The journal is also committed to the advancement of the science of systematic reviews and experimental methods in criminology and criminal justice. The journal seeks empirical papers on experimental and quasi-experimental studies, systematic reviews on substantive criminological and criminal justice issues, and methodological papers on experimentation and systematic review. The journal encourages submissions from scholars in the broad array of scientific disciplines that are concerned with criminology as well as crime and justice problems.