Abstract
Changes in the death qualification process suggest an increasing probability that jurors in capital cases will reject an insanity defense. The present study of 312 college undergraduates compares demographics and attitudes of death-qualified participants with those of their excludable counterparts, by varying standards for exclusion. When demographics were considered together, only religion predicted bias against the insanity defense, which was higher in those who identified with some form of Christianity. Further, religious fundamentalism, Christian orthodoxy, sociopolitical conservatism, and pro-prosecution bias were associated with stronger negative attitudes against the insanity defense. Results also support the contention that seating a death-qualified jury under either the Witherspoon or Witt standards increases bias against the insanity defense, although the consideration of automatic–death penalty jurors eliminates this effect.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
