Sunday, October 30, 2011

Automatic Thinking

Can You Crack The Code And Read the Hidden Message?


7H15 M355463 53RV35 70 PR0V3 H0W 0UR M1ND5 C4N D0 4M4Z1N6 7H1N65! 1MPR3551V3 7H1N65! 1N 7H3 B361NN1NG 17 W45 H4RD BU7 N0W, 0N 7H15 L1N3 Y0UR M1ND 15 R34D1N6 17 4U70M471C411Y W17H 0UT 3V3N 7H1NK1N6 4B0U7 17, B3 PR0UD! 0N1Y C34R741N P30PL3 C4N R34D 7H15. R3 P057 1F U CRN.


Juror Bias

12 Racist Men: Post-Verdict Evidence of Juror Bias





Harvard Journal of Racial & Ethnic Justice, Vol. 27, p. 165, 2011

Abstract:
Federal Evidence Rule 606(b) and similar state rules prohibit post-verdict admission of juror statements, including racist or biased remarks, made during deliberations. The roots of the evidentiary prohibition are historically deep and the interests underlying the Rule implicate the very existence of the jury system. Constitutionality of the post-verdict evidentiary exclusion is based upon the presumption that pre-trial and trial mechanisms exist to discern juror bias prior to deliberations. Empirical studies and recent cases indicate, however, that these mechanisms do not currently operate to adequately expose or remove juror biases. This article argues that the expansion of these mechanisms, including more diverse jury venires, more robust and effective juror voir dire, less discretion for parties to remove jurors on the basis of race, and the development of jury admonitions directly addressing bias, will reduce juror expressions of bias during deliberations. Even with these reforms, however, not all juror bias will be disclosed and, whether for reasons of embarrassment, inattention or intent, some jurors will misrepresent material biases during voir dire. To address juror misrepresentations during voir dire, the article proposes a narrow exception to Rule 606(b) permitting inquiry into juror bias for the purpose of showing juror misrepresentation. The article’s unique approach of combining enhanced pre-trial and trial mechanisms with a narrow exception to the rule to address juror misrepresentations strikes a balance between upholding the goals underlying Rule 606(b) and the right to a fair trial by an impartial jury.

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Interesting article worth reading

Fear, Greed, and Financial Crises: A Cognitive Neurosciences Perspective


Andrew W. Lo


MIT Sloan School of Management; MIT CSAIL; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)


October 13, 2011


Abstract:
Historical accounts of financial crises suggest that fear and greed are the common denominators of these disruptive events: periods of unchecked greed eventually lead to excessive leverage and unsustainable asset-price levels, and the inevitable collapse results in unbridled fear, which must subside before any recovery is possible. The cognitive neurosciences may provide some new insights into this boom/bust pattern through a deeper understanding of the dynamics of emotion and human behavior. In this chapter, I describe some recent research from the neurosciences literature on fear and reward learning, mirror neurons, theory of mind, and the link between emotion and rational behavior. By exploring the neuroscientific basis of cognition and behavior, we may be able to identify more fundamental drivers of financial crises, and improve our models and methods for dealing with them.



http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1943325

That's gross!: Study uncovers physiological nature of disgust in politics

That's gross!: Study uncovers physiological nature of disgust in politics

ScienceShot: Rock, Paper, Scissors Not So Random - ScienceNOW

ScienceShot: Rock, Paper, Scissors Not So Random - ScienceNOW
Interesting article about how people interact and how we are influenced by those with whom we interact. It would be interesting to know how jurors react, unconsciously, to us during trial.

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

The Complicated Psychology of Revenge - Association for Psychological Science

The Complicated Psychology of Revenge - Association for Psychological Science

Psychological Response to Harm

Personality Prior to Disability Determines Adaptation


Agreeable Individuals Recover Lost Life Satisfaction Faster and More Completely

  1. Christopher J. Boyce
  2. Alex M. Wood

+Author Affiliations

  1. University of Manchester
  1. Christopher J. Boyce, School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, United Kingdom E-mail: christopher.boyce@manchester.ac.uk

Abstract

Personality traits prior to the onset of illness or disability may influence how well an individual psychologically adjusts after the illness or disability has occurred. Previous research has shown that after the onset of a disability, people initially experience sharp drops in life satisfaction, and the ability to regain lost life satisfaction is at best partial. However, such research has not investigated the role of individual differences in adaptation to disability. We suggest that predisability personality determines the speed and extent of adaptation. We analyzed measures of personality traits in a sample of 11,680 individuals, 307 of whom became disabled over a 4-year period. We show that although becoming disabled has a severe impact on life satisfaction, this effect is significantly moderated by predisability personality. After 4 years of disability, moderately agreeable individuals had levels of life satisfaction 0.32 standard deviations higher than those of moderately disagreeable individuals. Agreeable individuals adapt more quickly and fully to disability; disagreeable individuals may need additional support to adapt.


http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/10/19/0956797611421790.abstract

Review of Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman - Association for Psychological Science

Review of Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman - Association for Psychological Science

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Saturday, October 8, 2011

In the brain, winning is everywhere

In the brain, winning is everywhere

http://www.cell.com/neuron/abstract/S0896-6273%2811%2900732-X?utm_source=ECE001&utm_campaign=&utm_content=&utm_medium=email&bid=RUI7L2F:T1HQ4

Reinforcements and punishments facilitate adaptive behavior in diverse domains ranging from perception to social interactions. A conventional approach to understanding the corresponding neural substrates focuses on the basal ganglia and its dopaminergic projections. Here, we show that reinforcement and punishment signals are surprisingly ubiquitous in the gray matter of nearly every subdivision of the human brain. Humans played either matching-pennies or rock-paper-scissors games against computerized opponents while being scanned using fMRI. Multivoxel pattern analysis was used to decode previous choices and their outcomes, and to predict upcoming choices. Whereas choices were decodable from a confined set of brain structures, their outcomes were decodable from nearly all cortical and subcortical structures. In addition, signals related to both reinforcements and punishments were recovered reliably in many areas and displayed patterns not consistent with salience-based explanations. Thus, reinforcement and punishment might play global modulatory roles in the entire brain.

Most of brain reacts to winning, losing: study

Most of brain reacts to winning, losing: study

In the brain, winning is everywhere

In the brain, winning is everywhere

Monday, October 3, 2011

Are Jurors Likely To Take The Pain Of An Unlikable Plaintiff Less Seriously?

When you dislike patients, pain is taken less seriously

Lies De Rudderea, Corresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author, Liesbet Gouberta, Ken Martin Prkachinb, Michael André Louis Stevensc, Dimitri Marcel Leon Van Ryckeghema, Geert Crombeza

aDepartment of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, B-9000 Gent, Belgium
bUniversity of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, BC, Canada
cDepartment of Data Analysis, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium


Abstract

This study examined the influence of patients’ likability on pain estimations made by observers. Patients’ likability was manipulated by means of an evaluative conditioning procedure: pictures of patients were combined with either positive, neutral, or negative personal traits. Next, videos of the patients were presented to 40 observers who rated the pain. Patients were expressing no, mild-, or high-intensity pain. Results indicated lower pain estimations as well as lower perceptual sensitivity toward pain (i.e., lower ability to discriminate between varying levels of pain expression) with regard to patients who were associated with negative personal traits. The effect on pain estimations was only found with regard to patients expressing high-intensity pain. There was no effect on response bias (i.e., the overall tendency to indicate pain). These findings suggest that we take the pain of patients we do not like less seriously than the pain of patients we like.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304395911004313

This research may well be instructive for plaintiff's lawyers.