I am a decision scientist and I am currently investigating how jurors make decisions. Although my research is very much theory driven, it has applications to the criminal justice system. I study how pre-trial biases, cognitive fallacies, and changes in the legal environment have an impact on both juror outcomes and juror decision processes. My research has utilised theories and models from psychology and mathematics in an attempt to find a model that can reliably describe the decision making processes of jurors.
My current research project looks to compare the decision making processes of jurors in a three-verdict system (where jurors can give a Guilty, a Not Guilty or a Not Proven verdict) with jurors in a two-verdict system (where only Guilty and Not Guilty verdicts are available). The not proven verdict has seen quite a lot of controversy of late, with several politicians trying to remove this ‘Not Proven’ option.
Teaching Associate , Edinburgh Napier University
Edinburgh Napier University , PhD
Edinburgh Napier University, BSc Honours Degree in Psychology (2:1)
Faith in thy threshold, Medicine, Science and the Law
Are consistent juror decisions related to fast and frugal decision making? Investigating the relationship between juror consistency, decision speed and cue utilisation. , Medicine, Science and the Law
The Relationship between the Big 5 Personality Traits and Eyewitness Recognition, Journal of Articles in Support of the Null Hypothesis
Decision Making Process of Jurors In Factbook: Psychology and Law, European Association of Psychology and Law Student Society
Heuristics:The good, the bad, and the biased - what value can bias have for decision-makers?, PSYPAG
Jury still out on merits of the Not Proven verdict, The Scotsman
Socio-Legal Studies Association
Scottish Institute of Policing Research
Postgraduate Forensic Psychology and Criminology Research Network