{"id":{"repo_id":"alabama","oai_identifier":"oai:ir.ua.edu:123456789/9513"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/alabama/oai:ir.ua.edu:123456789/9513","repository":{"repo_id":"alabama","name":"University of Alabama","base_url":"https://ir-api.ua.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Mock Juror Understanding of Complex Testimony: the Flynn Effect in Atkins Cases","abstract":"In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that individuals with intellectual disability (ID) could not be sentenced to death (Atkins vs. Virginia). Since this decision, triers-of-fact have been making determinations as to whether a defendant meets the diagnostic criteria for ID. The current study evaluated whether an expert witness' credentials and the complexity of their testimony would influence mock jurors' diagnostic determinations. Undergraduate students were exposed to testimony on the Flynn effect (a statistical phenomenon relevant to IQ scores and ID determinations) that varied in complexity. Credentials of the testifying defense expert witness were also manipulated. There was no significant effect of complexity level of the testimony, though scores on a post-hearing comprehension test suggested participants overall struggled to understand the Flynn effect. Testimony from a defense expert with more prestigious credentials was more persuasive, with participants being more likely to agree that the claimant meets diagnostic criteria for ID. In addition, participants' need for cognition (NFC) and other related attitudes were measured. Participants higher in NFC were more likely to scrutinize application of the Flynn effect and determine the claimant did not meet criteria for ID. Implications of these findings for legal actors in Atkins cases and future directions for researchers are discussed.","abstract_html":"In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that individuals with intellectual disability (ID) could not be sentenced to death (Atkins vs. Virginia). Since this decision, triers-of-fact have been making determinations as to whether a defendant meets the diagnostic criteria for ID. The current study evaluated whether an expert witness' credentials and the complexity of their testimony would influence mock jurors' diagnostic determinations. Undergraduate students were exposed to testimony on the Flynn effect (a statistical phenomenon relevant to IQ scores and ID determinations) that varied in complexity. Credentials of the testifying defense expert witness were also manipulated. There was no significant effect of complexity level of the testimony, though scores on a post-hearing comprehension test suggested participants overall struggled to understand the Flynn effect. Testimony from a defense expert with more prestigious credentials was more persuasive, with participants being more likely to agree that the claimant meets diagnostic criteria for ID. In addition, participants' need for cognition (NFC) and other related attitudes were measured. Participants higher in NFC were more likely to scrutinize application of the Flynn effect and determine the claimant did not meet criteria for ID. Implications of these findings for legal actors in Atkins cases and future directions for researchers are discussed.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Doran, Stephanie Chambers"],"institution":"University of Alabama Libraries","degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Cox, Jennifer","Gilpin, Ansley","Hart, William","Almond, Brad"],"advisors":["Salekin, Karen"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2022,"date_issued":"2022","date_published":"2022","updated_at":"2026-07-27T18:44:09Z","subjects":["dual processing","Flynn effect","intellectual disability","mock juror","need for cognition"],"languages":["en_US","English"],"rights":["All rights reserved by the author unless otherwise indicated."],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["http://purl.lib.ua.edu/186527","u0015_0000001_0004486","Doran_alatus_0004D_14985"],"render_values":[{"text":"http://purl.lib.ua.edu/186527","href":"http://purl.lib.ua.edu/186527","code":true},{"text":"u0015_0000001_0004486","href":null,"code":true},{"text":"Doran_alatus_0004D_14985","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://ir.ua.edu/handle/123456789/9513","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Cox, Jennifer","Gilpin, Ansley","Hart, William","Almond, Brad"]},{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Salekin, Karen"]},{"key":"dc:contributor.other","label":"Dc Contributor Other","values":["University of Alabama Tuscaloosa"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Doran, Stephanie Chambers"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2022-09-28T14:55:09Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2022-09-28T14:55:09Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2022"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["University of Alabama Libraries"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["thesis","text"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["dual processing","Flynn effect","intellectual disability","mock juror","need for cognition"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["English"]},{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en_US"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["All rights reserved by the author unless otherwise indicated."]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["http://purl.lib.ua.edu/186527","u0015_0000001_0004486","Doran_alatus_0004D_14985"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://ir.ua.edu/handle/123456789/9513"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["Electronic Thesis or Dissertation"]},{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that individuals with intellectual disability (ID) could not be sentenced to death (Atkins vs. Virginia). Since this decision, triers-of-fact have been making determinations as to whether a defendant meets the diagnostic criteria for ID. The current study evaluated whether an expert witness' credentials and the complexity of their testimony would influence mock jurors' diagnostic determinations. Undergraduate students were exposed to testimony on the Flynn effect (a statistical phenomenon relevant to IQ scores and ID determinations) that varied in complexity. Credentials of the testifying defense expert witness were also manipulated. There was no significant effect of complexity level of the testimony, though scores on a post-hearing comprehension test suggested participants overall struggled to understand the Flynn effect. Testimony from a defense expert with more prestigious credentials was more persuasive, with participants being more likely to agree that the claimant meets diagnostic criteria for ID. In addition, participants' need for cognition (NFC) and other related attitudes were measured. Participants higher in NFC were more likely to scrutinize application of the Flynn effect and determine the claimant did not meet criteria for ID. Implications of these findings for legal actors in Atkins cases and future directions for researchers are discussed."]},{"key":"dc:format.medium","label":"Dc Format Medium","values":["electronic"]},{"key":"dc:format.mimetype","label":"Dc Format Mimetype","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Mock Juror Understanding of Complex Testimony: the Flynn Effect in Atkins Cases"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Cox, Jennifer","Gilpin, Ansley","Hart, William","Almond, Brad"],"dc:contributor.advisor":["Salekin, Karen"],"dc:contributor.other":["University of Alabama Tuscaloosa"],"dc:creator":["Doran, Stephanie Chambers"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2022-09-28T14:55:09Z"],"dc:date.available":["2022-09-28T14:55:09Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2022"],"dc:description":["Electronic Thesis or Dissertation"],"dc:description.abstract":["In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that individuals with intellectual disability (ID) could not be sentenced to death (Atkins vs. Virginia). Since this decision, triers-of-fact have been making determinations as to whether a defendant meets the diagnostic criteria for ID. The current study evaluated whether an expert witness' credentials and the complexity of their testimony would influence mock jurors' diagnostic determinations. Undergraduate students were exposed to testimony on the Flynn effect (a statistical phenomenon relevant to IQ scores and ID determinations) that varied in complexity. Credentials of the testifying defense expert witness were also manipulated. There was no significant effect of complexity level of the testimony, though scores on a post-hearing comprehension test suggested participants overall struggled to understand the Flynn effect. Testimony from a defense expert with more prestigious credentials was more persuasive, with participants being more likely to agree that the claimant meets diagnostic criteria for ID. In addition, participants' need for cognition (NFC) and other related attitudes were measured. Participants higher in NFC were more likely to scrutinize application of the Flynn effect and determine the claimant did not meet criteria for ID. Implications of these findings for legal actors in Atkins cases and future directions for researchers are discussed."],"dc:format.medium":["electronic"],"dc:format.mimetype":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier.other":["http://purl.lib.ua.edu/186527","u0015_0000001_0004486","Doran_alatus_0004D_14985"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://ir.ua.edu/handle/123456789/9513"],"dc:language":["English"],"dc:language.iso":["en_US"],"dc:publisher":["University of Alabama Libraries"],"dc:rights":["All rights reserved by the author unless otherwise indicated."],"dc:subject":["dual processing","Flynn effect","intellectual disability","mock juror","need for cognition"],"dc:title":["Mock Juror Understanding of Complex Testimony: the Flynn Effect in Atkins Cases"],"dc:type":["thesis","text"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-27T18:44:09Z"}