Twelve Angry Men
Twelve Angry Men
Thomas Callihan
1. Was there any evidence of jury bias against the defendant? (halo bias, fundamental attribution error, primacy or recencey bias)
Throughout the film jury bias was evident towards the defendant. The halo effect is very apparent in the movie “12 Angry Men”. The halo effect is a type of cognitive bias in which our overall impression of a person influences how we feel and think about his or her character. Essentially, your overall impression of a person impacts your evaluations of that persons specific traits. At the beginning of the movie eleven of the twelve jurors automatically believed the boy was guilty mostly because they put their trust in the judicial system. What I mean by this statement, is, that the jurors believed he was guilty because he was on trial. So, before even listening to the case they put their trust in the investigators and had a guilty verdict waiting for the defendant. The halo effect was slowly built up for one character in the film. Throughout the movie Henry Fonda slowly persuaded the other jurors to change their votes. The impression he made on the men slowly influenced them to put thought in the case to come to a logical verdict. Fundamental attribution error is the tendency to make attributions to internal causes when focusing on someone else’s behavior. Fundamental attribution error is seen in Juror #3. He believes that the defendant is absolutely guilty and is the antagonist to the constantly calm Juror #8. During the film Juror #3 has emotional baggage due to the fact that he and his son have not spoken in two years. The last time he spoke to his son ended in a physical confrontation and the poor relationship with his own son biased his views toward the defendant. Recency bias is a tendency for some people to focus on “what’s happened lately” when evaluating or judging something. This is very apparent in the film and continued to be brought up by juror #3. Juror #3 believed the boy to
Thomas Callihan
1. Was there any evidence of jury bias against the defendant? (halo bias, fundamental attribution error, primacy or recencey bias)
Throughout the film jury bias was evident towards the defendant. The halo effect is very apparent in the movie “12 Angry Men”. The halo effect is a type of cognitive bias in which our overall impression of a person influences how we feel and think about his or her character. Essentially, your overall impression of a person impacts your evaluations of that persons specific traits. At the beginning of the movie eleven of the twelve jurors automatically believed the boy was guilty mostly because they put their trust in the judicial system. What I mean by this statement, is, that the jurors believed he was guilty because he was on trial. So, before even listening to the case they put their trust in the investigators and had a guilty verdict waiting for the defendant. The halo effect was slowly built up for one character in the film. Throughout the movie Henry Fonda slowly persuaded the other jurors to change their votes. The impression he made on the men slowly influenced them to put thought in the case to come to a logical verdict. Fundamental attribution error is the tendency to make attributions to internal causes when focusing on someone else’s behavior. Fundamental attribution error is seen in Juror #3. He believes that the defendant is absolutely guilty and is the antagonist to the constantly calm Juror #8. During the film Juror #3 has emotional baggage due to the fact that he and his son have not spoken in two years. The last time he spoke to his son ended in a physical confrontation and the poor relationship with his own son biased his views toward the defendant. Recency bias is a tendency for some people to focus on “what’s happened lately” when evaluating or judging something. This is very apparent in the film and continued to be brought up by juror #3. Juror #3 believed the boy to