IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v41y2012i5p558-573.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Group decision-making: An economic analysis of social influence and individual difference in experimental juries

Author

Listed:
  • Baddeley, Michelle
  • Parkinson, Sophia

Abstract

In jury decision-making, individual viewpoints must converge to reach a group consensus. Convergence of viewpoints may reflect reasonable compromises, for example if jury deliberations reflect informational influences and social learning which allow individual jurors to correct biases, misunderstandings and/or imperfect recall of evidence. Conversely, some individuals may converge towards others’ viewpoints because of normative influences including peer pressure and preferences for conformity and these can generate biases in the final jury judgements. This paper presents experimental data showing that groups do have a significant tendency to compromise in jury-like settings. Econometric evidence shows that group characteristics, including the presence of acquaintances and strangers within the jury group, affect the extent of compromise. The implications are that jury deliberations may be biased by factors not relevant to a specific case, limiting the objectivity of jury decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Baddeley, Michelle & Parkinson, Sophia, 2012. "Group decision-making: An economic analysis of social influence and individual difference in experimental juries," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 558-573.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:41:y:2012:i:5:p:558-573
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2012.04.023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053535712000522
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cup:apsrev:v:90:y:1996:i:01:p:34-45_20 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Chamley,Christophe P., 2004. "Rational Herds," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521530927.
    3. Uri Gneezy & Aldo Rustichini, 2000. "Pay Enough or Don't Pay at All," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 115(3), pages 791-810.
    4. Ladha, Krishna K., 1995. "Information pooling through majority-rule voting: Condorcet's jury theorem with correlated votes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 353-372, May.
    5. Sanjeev Goyal, 2007. "Introduction to Connections: An Introduction to the Economics of Networks," Introductory Chapters,in: Connections: An Introduction to the Economics of Networks Princeton University Press.
    6. George A. Akerlof & Rachel E. Kranton, 2000. "Economics and Identity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 115(3), pages 715-753.
    7. repec:cup:apsrev:v:94:y:2000:i:02:p:407-423_22 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. George A. Akerlof, 1980. "A Theory of Social Custom, of which Unemployment may be One Consequence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 94(4), pages 749-775.
    9. Baddeley, M. & Burke, C. & Schultz, W. & Tobler, T., 2010. "Impacts of Personality on Herding in Financial Decision-Making," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1006, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    10. Chamley,Christophe P., 2004. "Rational Herds," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521824019.
    11. Peter M. DeMarzo & Dimitri Vayanos & Jeffrey Zwiebel, 2003. "Persuasion Bias, Social Influence, and Unidimensional Opinions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 118(3), pages 909-968.
    12. repec:cup:apsrev:v:92:y:1998:i:01:p:23-35_20 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Lisa R. Anderson & Charles A. Holt, 1996. "Classroom Games: Information Cascades," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(4), pages 187-193, Fall.
    14. Kaushik Mukhopadhaya, 2003. "Jury Size and the Free Rider Problem," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 24-44, April.
    15. Shiller, Robert J, 1995. "Conversation, Information, and Herd Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(2), pages 181-185, May.
    16. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Hirshleifer, David & Welch, Ivo, 1992. "A Theory of Fads, Fashion, Custom, and Cultural Change in Informational Cascades," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(5), pages 992-1026, October.
    17. Nocetti Diego, 2008. "The Biasing Effects of Memory Distortions on the Process of Legal Decision-Making," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 319-339, October.
    18. Michelle Baddeley, 2006. "Behind the black box: a survey of real-world investment appraisal approaches," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 33(5), pages 329-350, December.
    19. Anderson, Lisa R & Holt, Charles A, 1997. "Information Cascades in the Laboratory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(5), pages 847-862, December.
    20. Matthew Rabin, 1998. "Psychology and Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 11-46, March.
    21. Abhijit V. Banerjee, 1992. "A Simple Model of Herd Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 107(3), pages 797-817.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Herding; Social influence; Legal decision-making; Personality; Behavioural economics;

    JEL classification:

    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:41:y:2012:i:5:p:558-573. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620175 .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.