Effects of pre‐trial publicity and jury deliberation on juror bias and source memory errors

Abstract

We examined the effects of exposure to pre-trial publicity (PTP) and jury deliberation on juror memory and decision making. Mock jurors either read news articles containing negative PTP or articles unrelated to the trial. They later viewed a videotaped murder trial, after which they either made collaborative group decisions about guilt or individual decisions. Finally, all participants independently attributed specific information as having been presented during the trial or in the news articles. Exposure to PTP significantly affected guilty verdicts, sentence length, perceptions of defendant credibility, and misattributions of PTP as having been presented as trial evidence. Jury deliberation had significant effects on jury verdicts, perceptions of defendant credibility, source memory for trial items, and confidence in source memory judgements, but did not affect sentences or critical source memory errors.

Predicting guilt judgments and verdict change using a measure of pretrial bias in a videotaped mock trial with deliberating jurors

“…However, it is worth noting that, for a trial of this length, establishing a 30-minute deliberation period is a common practice (e.g. Kassin & Wrightsman, 1983;Ruva et al, 2007). Moreover, we found that the mean deliberation time used by jurors (M 018 minutes) fell far short of the time limit of 30 minutes.…”

“…For example, Kramer, Kerr, & Carroll (1990) found that the effects of negative pretrial publicity on verdicts emerged only after deliberation. Similarly, Ruva, McEvoy, and Bryant (2007) found the effects of pretrial publicity increased following deliberation. London and Nunez (2000) found deliberation to temper jurors' tendency to rely on inadmissible evidence in the guilt judgments.…”

“…The present study extended the ecological validity of the research concerning the PJAQ by allowing mock jurors to deliberate as a group. As indicated previously, courts tend to regard the deliberation process as an important correction for bias, where group decisions potentially allow for errors to be detected and misconceptions to be erased (Kaplan & Miller, 1978;Ruva et al, 2007). Yet, psycho-legal researchers remain divided on the importance of the deliberation process, and little of the study of deliberating juries has directly addressed juror bias.…”

From the shadows into the light: How pretrial publicity and deliberation affect mock jurors’ decisions, impressions, and memory.

“…guilt ratings (Ruva & McEvoy, 2008;Ruva et al, 2007). Ruva and McEvoy (2008) found that jurors exposed to PTP rated the prosecutor higher and the defense attorney lower on overall ability and likability than jurors not exposed to PTP.…”

“…Ruva et al (2007) found that mock jurors had good memory for both PTP and trial information, but with high confidence believed that the PTP information was also presented at trial. These critical SM errors mediated the effect of PTP on guilt ratings.…”