An internal locus of control Essay

An congenital venue of take is the belief that unrivalleds fate is determined by ones own behavior. dapple the outside locus of control is the belief that what happens is determined not by ones own actions but by powerful others, luck, and external forces (Kassin and Wrightsman 1988, 32). What this is saying is that the psychological process of defining the reasoning behind why someone is doing something is that there is either an privileged or external locus of control that is determining the factors around the individual.According to the halt on rogue 313 there argon times when a judge can determine that a person who has a particular background, occupation or slur would not be a good juror for a trial. This is because their internal locus of control could sway their decision making ability found on what they know and what they deplete utilized in their profession. In one instance that was described in the book there were two jurors that were unploughed out of a trial based on their own internal locus of control. One of these jurors was a scientist while the other worked in faith management.Based on the case it was considered that these two potential jurors might not be competent to aroma at the situation completely ingenuous and therefore these two jurors were let go from the jury. This is one example on how an internal locus of control can affect someone who is a potential juror (Greene, Heilbrun, Fortune, and Nietzel 2006). A way that the external locus of control can affect someone who is a juror is a slice different. What this means is that someone is being seed by outside influences which would make them dark in some way to the decision making process.According to the book on page 303 there is a discussion about the interviewing that occurred in the O. J. Simpson trial when looking for jurors. The overwhelming conclusion was that there was a prevalence for African American women to think that some forms of abuse were okay in relati onships and this is an external influence to their overall opinions of things. Therefore this influence could influence how the jurors felt about the abuse that O. J. s wife had suffered from and therefore they might have a bias (Greene, Heilbrun, Fortune, and Nietzel 2006).Provide an opinion on whether jurors are able to disregard inadmissible evidence using theories discussed in the text, why or why not? According to the book on pages 338-340 there are a number of ways that a juror can look into disregarding evidence that has been determined to be inadmissible. Whether or not this is very possible is a different story. The text describes some different ways that the evidence can be disregarded. These include the reactance theory which is if instructed to disregard authorized information the overall decision making ability of the juror could be compromised.Through this theory it is common that someone would use some part of thought suppression to block the material from their thoughts. It is thought that even though this material has been marked as inadmissible that it could possibly still influence the jurys overall decision (Greene, Heilbrun, Fortune, and Nietzel 2006). In my opinion it could be possible for a juror to disregard inadmissible information moreover it would be very difficult and it might cause problems for the individual as well.It would be difficult to forget something that was mentioned if it was something that would strongly influence ones decision however if it was material that was not a big shoot then it would not be apt(predicate) that this would have much influence. In one study that was conducted jurors who were given proacquittal inadmissible information were less likely to convict than those who were given proconviction inadmissible information (Thompson, Fong, and Rosenhan 1981).