Steven D. Penrod
Steven D.
Penrod
Distinguished Professor
Phone number
212.237.8877
Room number
10.65.03 NB

Download CV

Education

1979   PhD   Social Psychology, Harvard University
1974   JD      Harvard Law School
1969   BA      Yale College, Poli. Sci,

 

Bio
Steven D. Penrod joined the John Jay faculty as Distinguished Professor of Psychology in 2001. He earned his J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1974 and his Ph.D. in psychology from Harvard University in 1979. He was previously on the faculties of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, the University of Minnesota Law School and the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. He has over 150 publications; is a co-author of books on juries, on eyewitnesses, introductory psychology and social psychology; and a co-editor of volumes on research methods in forensic psychology and comparative psychology and law.   Professor Penrod's research and writing have focused on decision-making in legal contexts. He has written about the effects of jury size and decision rules on jury decision-making, death penalty decision-making, juror's use of probabilistic and hearsay evidence, comprehension of legal instructions, and the impact of extra-legal influences such as pretrial publicity, joinder of charges, the effects of cameras in the courtroom, the and the effects of juror questioning of witnesses on jury performance. His research and writing about eyewitness evidence has encompassed factors that reduce eyewitness reliability and lineup procedures that may enhance eyewitness performance,  jury assessments of eyewitness evidence, the relationship between eyewitness confidence and eyewitness accuracy and the effects of eyewitness expert testimony and jury instructions on jury decision-making.
Scholarly Work

Google Scholar: goo.gl/W480EC

Jones, A.M., Heuer, L., & Penrod, S. & Udell, D. (2018). Perceptions of access to justice among unrepresented tenants: An examination of procedural justice and deservingness in New York City housing court. Journal of Forensic Psychology Research and Practice, 1-20.  https://doi.org/10.1080/24732850.2018.1532191

Jones, A.M., & Penrod, S. (2018). Improving the Effectiveness of the Henderson Instruction Safeguard against Unreliable Eyewitness Identification. Psychology, Crime and Law, 24, 177-193.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2017.1390113

Wilford, M. M., Van Horn, M. C., Penrod, S. D. & Greathouse, S. M.  (2018). Not Separate but Equal? The Impact of Multiple-Defendant Trials on Juror Decision-Making.  Psychology, Crime & Law, 14-37. http//dx.doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2017.1351969

Jones, A. M. & Penrod, S. D. (2017).  Research-Based Instructions Induce Sensitivity to Confession Evidence.  Psychiatry, Psychology and Law. 1-16.   
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2017.1364677

Dillon, M. K., Jones, A. M, Bergold, A. N., Hui, C., & Penrod, S. D. (2017).  Henderson instructions: Do they enhance evidence evaluation?  Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 17, 1-24.             http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15228932.2017.1235964

Smith, A.M., Wells, G.W., Lindsay, R.C.L. & Penrod, S.D. (2017). Fair Lineups Are Better Than Biased Lineups and Showups, but Not Because They Increase Underlying Discriminability.  Law and Human Behavior,  41, 127–145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000219

Jones, A. M., Bergold, A. N., Dillon, M. K. & Penrod, S. D. (2017). Comparing the effectiveness of Henderson instructions and expert testimony: Which safeguard improves jurors’ evaluations of eyewitness evidence?  Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1-24.
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11292-016-9279-6

​see CV link below for older papers

Research Summary

RESEARCH AND PROGRAM GRANTS (recent)
National Science Foundation. Building Tools for Assessing the State of Eyewitness Science ($199,817, 5/1/18-10/31/19). 
National Science Foundation. The responsibility of judges to assure due process: Tension among neutrality, rights protection, and role ($193,796, 07/15-06/16). With Larry Heuer.
National Science Foundation. Issue-Specific Jury Instructions ​($194,262, 09/12-08/15).
National Science Foundation. Factors influencing plea bargaining decisions by prosecutors and defense attorneys. ($93,200, 09/09-08/11).
National Science Foundation. Understanding the Impact on Juries Of Defense Responses To Victim Impact Statements.  ($245,813—8/08-8/11).
National Science Foundation, Field and Lab Studies of the Effects of Pretrial Publicity on Jurors’ Trial Judgments.  ($275,000, 8/1/06-7/31/08).

See CV link below for older grants