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

摘要审前公示(PTP)问题。Minow&Amp；Cate(2001)估计，在1980年代，至少有3100名被告声称，由于围绕他们的案件有大量消极的PTP，他们不能得到公平的审判。一项复制了他们的方法的新搜索表明，1994年至2005年间，声称由于PTP而不可能进行公平审判的被告数量远远超过7000人。被告有理由感到担忧。过去40年进行的研究表明，审前公示(PTP)可能会对陪审员在收到大量PTP的案件中对被告的看法产生负面影响；然而，一些人辩称，结论主要是从实验室研究得出的，所使用的方法不能准确和完全反映真实审判期间发生的事情。在PTP实验室实验中，模拟陪审员接触PTP，然后根据简短的审判陈述做出决定，这些实验大多基于人工PTP、人工暴露于PTP、稀疏的审判证据和学生陪审员。在处理与PTP相关的问题时，法院一直不愿依赖这些研究，例如，法官Richard Matsch在Timothy McVeigh审判的地点变更决定中表达了他对主要由模拟试验组成的研究的担忧(U.S.v McVeigh，1996，p.1473)。使用符合陪审团资格的成年人对真实案件中接触真实PTP的影响进行的调查研究也表明，PTP可以影响审前判决(这种影响甚至比实验室实验中发现的更强)。然而，调查研究不能解决PTP影响因暴露于试验证据而减少的可能性。另一个问题是，法官依赖陪审员的陈述，即他们可以搁置PTP，公正地裁决案件，尽管一些研究和我们的试点工作对这一主张提出了质疑。研究目标。这项拟议的研究旨在解决人们对实验和调查方法的担忧，结合这两种方法的优点，使用真实案例和案例证据研究真实PTP、自然和操纵暴露于真实PTP的影响。本研究使用具有代表性的符合评审团资格的社区成员样本来进一步提高外部效度。这些研究将考察基于理论的关于调解过程的假设，即PTP被认为发挥其作用，并确定PTP的组成部分如何负面或正面地影响陪审员对被告的推断，以及负面或正面影响最终判决。实验。将对PTP影响进行实地和实验室研究：研究1将利用审判所在地区一个PTP较高的实际正在进行的案件，使用从该地区招募的符合陪审团资格的研究参与者(评估了PTP的自然暴露水平)的代表性样本，以及从案件宣传较少的附近地区招募的参与者。第二组参与者将接触到实验操纵的低水平和高水平的PTP，这些PTP对控方/原告或被告有利，并以报纸形式或电视新闻形式(内容相等)呈现。在审判之前，将评估参与者的判决倾向以及各种人口统计学和审判相关的态度。在实际审判过程中，参与者将(通过网站)获得实际开庭陈词、审判证据和证人证词、结案陈词和法律指示的摘要(所有这些都以实际的庭审记录为基础)。裁决偏好(以及其他措施，特别是利用基于理论的调解机制的措施)将在每个时间点进行评估。这些研究的特别优势在于，它们将允许比较实验和自然暴露条件下的PTP效应(目前研究完全独立于彼此)，将利用实际的PTP和实际试验(在调查研究中常见，在实验研究中几乎不存在)，并将利用丰富的试验刺激材料(在调查研究中不存在，在实验研究中很少见)。试点工作证明了研究计划的可行性，并证明了PTP效应和未来陪审员对PTP效应缺乏认识。研究二和研究三将利用PTP和来自实际实验的实验材料，对故事模型和预测偏差理论得出的关于PTP效应发生机制的理论预测进行实验检验。这项研究将使用一组具有代表性的样本，包括符合陪审团资格的成年人和学生，并将检验PTP在陪审团审议中的影响。更广泛的影响。拟议的研究将使用一种新的方法，更好地深入了解PTP影响陪审员对被告的初步看法、陪审员随后对审判证据及其裁决的解释和评价的影响和机制。该项目将为学生(从本科生到博士后)提供大量的研究机会。这项研究的主要地点是纽约州立大学约翰·杰学院。John Jay的学生非常多样化，在本科生水平上，37%是西班牙裔，21%是非裔美国人，6%是亚裔，研究生课程也有很大的多样性。在全国范围内，约翰·杰伊在西语裔四年制大学招生人数中排名第25位，心理学专业授予西语裔学位的数量在全国排名第三。参与研究的学生将反映学院多样化的学生群体。

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.