How the need for cognition scale predicts behavior in mock jury deliberations

The role of Need for Cognition (NC) in mock jury deliberations was examined. Study 1 showed that when groups of 4 (2 high and 2 low in NC) deliberated together, high-NCs spoke significantly longer than low-NCs and were perceived as more active and more persuasive. High-NCs were not, however, viewed as generating arguments that were more valid or more logical. In Study 2, participants deliberated in dyads with a confederate who delivered either strong or weak arguments against the participant's position. Contrary to expectation, low-NCs were more responsive to differences in argument quality. The findings suggest that, in mock jury deliberations, high-NCs are the active participators whereas low-NCs are the quiet contemplators. Implications for legal practice and policy are discussed.