Field and Lab Studies of the Effects of Pretrial Publicity on Jurors' Trial Judgments

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

Abstract The Problem of Pretrial Publicity (PTP). Minow & Cate (2001) estimate that in the 1980s at least 3,100 defendants claimed they could not be tried in a fair manner due to the significant amounts of negative PTP surrounding their case. A new search replicating their methods indicates the number of defendants who claimed a fair trial was impossible as a result of PTP between 1994 and 2005 is well over 7000. Defendants have reason to be concerned. Research conducted over the past 40 years indicates that pretrial publicity (PTP) can negatively influence jurors' perceptions of a defendant in cases receiving substantial PTP; however, some have argued that conclusions are being drawn largely from laboratory research using methods which do not accurately and completely reflect what occurs during a real trial. PTP lab experiments in which mock jurors are exposed to PTP and then make a decision based on a short trial presentation are mostly based on artificial PTP, artificial exposure to PTP, sparse trial evidence, and student jurors. Courts have been hesitant to rely on these studies when handling PTP-related issues e.g., judge Richard Matsch in his venue-change decision for the Timothy McVeigh trial voiced his concerns about research consisting largely of simulated trials (U.S. v McVeigh, 1996, p. 1473). Survey studies examining the effects of exposure to real PTP in real cases using jury-eligible adults also indicate that PTP can influence pretrial judgments (the effects are even stronger than those found in lab experiments). However, the survey studies cannot address the possibility that PTP effects are reduce by exposure to trial evidence. As a further problem, judges rely on jurors' representations that they can put aside PTP and decide a case impartially though some studies and our pilot work casts doubts on that proposition. Research Goals. The proposed research is designed to address concerns about experimental and survey methods by combining the strengths of both methods to study the impact of real PTP, natural and manipulated exposure to real PTP using real cases and case evidence. The research uses representative samples of jury-eligible community members to further enhance external validity. The studies will examine theory-based hypotheses about mediational processes thorough which PTP is thought to exert its effects, and determine how components of PTP negatively or positively influence jurors' inferences about the defendant and negatively or positively influence final judgments. Experiments. Field and laboratory studies of PTP effects will be conducted: Study 1 will make use of an actual on-going case with high PTP in the region where the trial takes place using a representative sample of jury-eligible research participants recruited from that region (with natural levels of PTP-exposure assessed) and participants recruited from nearby areas where the case has been much-less publicized. The second group of participants will be exposed to experimentally-manipulated low- and high-levels of PTP that favors either the prosecution/plaintiff or the defendant and which is presented in either newspaper form or TV-news form (equated for content). Participants' verdict predispositions and a variety of demographic and trial-relevant attitudes will be assessed prior to trial. During the course of the actual trial, participants will be given (via a website) summaries of the actual opening statements, trial evidence and witness testimony, closing arguments and legal instructions (all based on the actual trial transcript). Verdict preferences (and other measures particularly measures that tap into theory-based mediating mechanisms) will be assessed at each point in time. Particular strengths of the studies are that they will allow comparisons of PTP effects across experimental and natural exposure conditions (at present the studies are completely independent of one-another), will make use of actual PTP and actual trials (common in survey studies, virtually non-existent in experimental studies), and will make use of rich trial stimulus materials (non-existent in survey studies and rare in experimental studies). Pilot work has demonstrated the viability of the research plan and demonstrated both PTP effects and a lack of awareness of PTP effects among prospective jurors. Studies 2 and 3 will make use of PTP and trial materials from actual trials to experimentally test theoretical predictions drawn from the story model and predecisional bias theory concerning mechanisms through which PTP effects occur. This study will use a mix of a representative sample of jury eligible adults and students and will examine PTP effects in jury deliberations. Broader Impact. The proposed research will use a novel methodology that will provide much better insights into the impact and mechanisms through which PTP influences jurors' initial perceptions of defendants, jurors' subsequent interpretations and evaluations of trial evidence and their verdicts. This project will offer substantial research opportunities to students (from the undergraduate to the post-doctoral level). The primary site for the research is John Jay College-CUNY. John Jay has an extremely diverse student body 37% Hispanic, 21% African American, 6% Asian at the undergraduate level and significant diversity in the graduate programs. Nationally, John Jay is ranked 25th among four-year colleges for Hispanic enrollment and the psychology major ranks third highest nationally for the number of degrees awarded to Hispanics. The students participating in the research will reflect the college's diverse student population.