The investigator examined the relationship between jurors' locus of control and verdict. Three hypothetical insanity cases were constructed: mental illness, mental retardation, and drug intoxication, and were randomly distributed to 96 graduate students from a mid- Atlantic university. Participants read a murder vignette and selected a verdict-either guilty or not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI). To measure locus of control, the investigator administered Rotter's Internal-External Locus of Control Scale. As predicted, results indicated that participants' locus of control influenced their verdict and that internally oriented participants were more likely than externally oriented participants to choose the guilty verdict (p=.044). A significant difference was also found between extreme internals and externals (p=.041) on verdict. Additionally, measures conducted across participants' career orientation groups: Helping Profession, Legal, and Business, revealed significant differences between stereotypes of insanity on verdict (p=.033) and on verdict alone (p=.016). Helping Professionals were more likely to choose a not guilty by reason of insanity verdict than Business and Legal oriented participants. Business orientated participants, however, were most likely to render a not guilty verdict to a defendant with mental retardation if they knew someone from that stigmatized group.
","abstract_html":"<p>The investigator examined the relationship between jurors' locus of control and verdict. Three hypothetical insanity cases were constructed: mental illness, mental retardation, and drug intoxication, and were randomly distributed to 96 graduate students from a mid- Atlantic university. Participants read a murder vignette and selected a verdict-either guilty or not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI). To measure locus of control, the investigator administered Rotter's Internal-External Locus of Control Scale. As predicted, results indicated that participants' locus of control influenced their verdict and that internally oriented participants were more likely than externally oriented participants to choose the guilty verdict (p=.044). A significant difference was also found between extreme internals and externals (p=.041) on verdict. Additionally, measures conducted across participants' career orientation groups: Helping Profession, Legal, and Business, revealed significant differences between stereotypes of insanity on verdict (p=.033) and on verdict alone (p=.016). Helping Professionals were more likely to choose a not guilty by reason of insanity verdict than Business and Legal oriented participants. Business orientated participants, however, were most likely to render a not guilty verdict to a defendant with mental retardation if they knew someone from that stigmatized group.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Hess, Marta"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"M.A. in Mental Health Counseling and Applied Psychology","degree_level":"Thesis","degree_discipline":"Psychology","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Gaer, Eleanor"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2009,"date_issued":"2009-05-05T07:00:00Z","date_published":"2009-05-05T07:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T04:13:27Z","subjects":["Insanity defense; Jurors--Psychology","Psychology"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://rdw.rowan.edu/etd/626","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Gaer, Eleanor"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Hess, Marta"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2016-03-17T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Psychology"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["M.A. in Mental Health Counseling and Applied Psychology"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Insanity defense; Jurors--Psychology","Psychology"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://rdw.rowan.edu/etd/626"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The investigator examined the relationship between jurors' locus of control and verdict. Three hypothetical insanity cases were constructed: mental illness, mental retardation, and drug intoxication, and were randomly distributed to 96 graduate students from a mid- Atlantic university. Participants read a murder vignette and selected a verdict-either guilty or not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI). To measure locus of control, the investigator administered Rotter's Internal-External Locus of Control Scale. As predicted, results indicated that participants' locus of control influenced their verdict and that internally oriented participants were more likely than externally oriented participants to choose the guilty verdict (p=.044). A significant difference was also found between extreme internals and externals (p=.041) on verdict. Additionally, measures conducted across participants' career orientation groups: Helping Profession, Legal, and Business, revealed significant differences between stereotypes of insanity on verdict (p=.033) and on verdict alone (p=.016). Helping Professionals were more likely to choose a not guilty by reason of insanity verdict than Business and Legal oriented participants. Business orientated participants, however, were most likely to render a not guilty verdict to a defendant with mental retardation if they knew someone from that stigmatized group.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Criminally responsible or insane? the influence of jurors' concept of self toward the insanity defense"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Gaer, Eleanor"],"dc:creator":["Hess, Marta"],"dc:date.available":["2016-03-17T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["The investigator examined the relationship between jurors' locus of control and verdict. Three hypothetical insanity cases were constructed: mental illness, mental retardation, and drug intoxication, and were randomly distributed to 96 graduate students from a mid- Atlantic university. Participants read a murder vignette and selected a verdict-either guilty or not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI). To measure locus of control, the investigator administered Rotter's Internal-External Locus of Control Scale. As predicted, results indicated that participants' locus of control influenced their verdict and that internally oriented participants were more likely than externally oriented participants to choose the guilty verdict (p=.044). A significant difference was also found between extreme internals and externals (p=.041) on verdict. Additionally, measures conducted across participants' career orientation groups: Helping Profession, Legal, and Business, revealed significant differences between stereotypes of insanity on verdict (p=.033) and on verdict alone (p=.016). Helping Professionals were more likely to choose a not guilty by reason of insanity verdict than Business and Legal oriented participants. Business orientated participants, however, were most likely to render a not guilty verdict to a defendant with mental retardation if they knew someone from that stigmatized group.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://rdw.rowan.edu/etd/626"],"dc:subject":["Insanity defense; Jurors--Psychology","Psychology"],"dc:title":["Criminally responsible or insane? the influence of jurors' concept of self toward the insanity defense"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Psychology"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["M.A. in Mental Health Counseling and Applied Psychology"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T04:13:27Z"}