The effects of general pretrial publicity on juror decisions: An examination of moderators and mediating mechanisms

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 43-72

  Kovera, Margaret Bull ^a  

^a FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; COLLEGE STUDENT; CONFERENCE PAPER; COURT; CRIME; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; GUILT; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; MASS MEDIUM; RAPE; SEXUAL CRIME; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CRIMINAL LAW; LEGAL ASPECT; PUBLIC OPINION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; TELEVISION;

ADULT; CRIMINAL LAW; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PREJUDICE; PUBLIC OPINION; RAPE; TELEVISION;

EID: 0036481451     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1013829224920     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (57)

1. Antunes, G. E., & Hurley, P. A. (1978). The representation of criminal events in Houston's two daily papers. Journalism Quarterly, 55, 756-760.
2. Bargh, J. A., Bond, R. N., Lombardi, W. J., & Tota, M. E. (1986). The additive nature of chronic and temporary sources of construct accessibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 869-878.
3. Borgida, E., & White, P. (1978). Social perception of rape victims: The impact of legal reform. Law and Human Behavior, 2, 339-351.
4. Bornstein, B. H. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75-91.
5. Brekke, N. C. (1985). Expert scientific testimony in rape trials. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
6. Brekke, N., & Borgida, E. (1988). Expert psychological testimony in rape trials: A social-cognitive analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 372-386.
7. Burt, M. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 217-230.
8. Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82, 407-428.
9. Downing, J. W., Judd, C. M., & Brauer, M. (1992). Effects of repeated expressions on attitude extremity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 17-29.
10. Dreschel, R., Netteburg, K., & Aborisade, B. (1980). Community size and newspaper reporting of local courts. Journalism Quarterly, 57, 71-78.
11. Fazio, R. H. (1990). A practical guide to the use of response latency in social psychological research. In C. Hendrick & M. S. Clark (Eds.), Research methods in personality and social psychology (pp. 74-97). New York: Sage.
12. Feild, H. (1978a). Attitudes toward rape: A comparative analysis of police, rapists, crisis counselors, and citizens. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 156-179.
13. Feild, H. S. (1978b). Juror background characteristics and attitudes toward rape: Correlates of jurors' decisions in rape trials. Law and Human Behavior, 2, 73-93.
14. Feild, H. S., & Bienen, L. B. (1980). Jurors and rape: A study in psychology and law. Lexington, MA: Heath.
15. Feldman, S., & Sigelman, L. (1985). The political impact of prime-time television. "The day after." Journal of Politics, 47, 556-578.
16. Frazier, P., & Borgida, E. (1988). Juror common understanding and the admissibility of rape trauma syndrome evidence in court. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 101-122.
17. Freedman, D. (1993. May 16). Taking on Hill: A conservative's book, praised as 'serious work of investigative journalism,' rebuts charges that nearly brought down Clarence Thomas' career. Minneapolis Star Tribune, pp. 17A, 19A.
18. Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Eleey, M., Jackson-Beeck, M., Jeffries-Fox, S., & Signorielli, N. (1977). TV violence profile no. 8: The highlights. Journal of Communication, 27, 171-180.
19. Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., & Signorielli, N. (1980). The mainstreaming of America: Violence profile no. 11. Journal of Communication, 30, 10-29.
20. Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., & Signorielli, N. (1982). Charting the mainstream: Television's contributions to political orientations. Journal of Communication, 32, 100-127.
21. Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Signorielli, N., Morgan, M., & Jackson-Beeck, M. (1979). The demonstration of power: Violence profile no. 10. Journal of Communication, 29, 177-196.
22. Giner-Sorolla, R., & Chaiken, S. (1994). The causes of hostile media judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 165-180.
23. Graber, D. A. (1980). Crime news and the public. New York: Praeger.
24. Greene, E., & Loftus, E. F. (1984). What's new in the news?: The influence of well-publicized news events on psychological research and courtroom trials. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 5, 211-221.
25. Greene, E., & Wade, R. (1988). Of private talk and public print: General pre-trial publicity and juror decision-making. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2, 123-135.
26. Hans, V. P., & Dee, J. L. (1991). Media coverage of law: Its impact on juries and the public. American Behavioral Scientist, 35, 136-149.
27. Hastie, R., & Park, B. (1986). The relationship between memory and judgment depends on whether the judgment task is memory-based or on-line. Psychological Review, 93, 258-268.
28. Hastie, R., Penrod, S. D., & Pennington, N. (1983). Inside the jury. Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press.
29. Herr, P. M. (1986). Consequences of priming: Judgment and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1106-1115.
30. Herr, P. M., Sherman, S. J., & Fazio, R. H. (1983). On the consequences of priming: Assimilation and contrast effects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 323-340.
31. Higgins, E. T., & Lurie, L. (1983). Context, categorization, and memory: The "change-of-standard" effect. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 525-547.
32. Higgins, E. T., Rholes, W. S., & Jones, C. R. (1977). Category accessibility and impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 141-154.
33. Humphries, D. (1981). Serious crime news coverage and ideology: A content analysis of crime coverage in a metropolitan paper. Crime and Delinquency, 27, 191-205.
34. Iyengar, S. (1990). Framing responsibility for political issues: The case of poverty. Political Behavior, 12, 19-40.
35. Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
36. Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D. R. (1985). Psychological accounts of agenda-setting. In S. Kraus & R. Perloff (Eds.), Mass media and political thought. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
37. Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D. R. (1987). News that matters. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
38. Iyengar, S., Kinder, D. R., Peters, M. D., & Krosnick, J. A. (1984). The evening news and presidential evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 778-787.
39. Iyengar, S., Peters, M. E., & Kinder, D. R. (1982). Experimental demonstrations of the "not-so-minimal" consequences of television news programs. American Political Science Review, 76, 848-858.
40. Katz, I., & Hass, R. G. (1988). Racial ambivalence and American value conflict: Correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 893-905.
41. Kerr, N. L., & Bray, R. M. (1982). The psychology of the courtroom. New York: Academic Press.
42. Kramer, G. P., Kerr, N. L., & Carroll, J. S. (1990). Pretrial publicity, judicial remedies, and jury bias. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 409-438.
43. Linz, D., & Penrod, S. (1992). Exploring the first and sixth amendments: Pre-trial publicity and jury decision making. In D. K. Kagehiro & W. S. Laufer (Eds.). Handbook of psychology and law (pp. 3-20). New York: Springer.
44. Lodge, M., McGraw, K., & Stroh, P. (1989). An impression-driven model of candidate evaluation. American Political Science Review, 84, 399-419.
45. Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2098-2109.
46. McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36, 176-185.
47. McGuire, W. J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 233-346). New York: Random House.
48. Millspaugh, M. (1949). Trial by mass media? Public Opinion Quarterly, 13, 328-329.
49. Mullin, C., Imrich, D. J., & Linz, D. (1996). The impact of acquaintance rape stories and case-specific pretrial publicity on juror decision making. Communication Research, 23, 100-135.
50. Ogloff, J. R. P. (2000). Two steps forward and one step backward: The law and psychology movement(s) in the 20th Century. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 457-483.
51. Olsen-Fulero, L., & Fulero, S. (1997). Commonsense rape judgments: An empathy-complexity theory of rape juror story making. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3, 402-427.
52. Otto, A. L., Penrod, S. D., & Dexter, H. R. (1994). The biasing impact of pretrial publicity on juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 453-469.
53. Protess, D. L., Leff, D. R., Brooks, S. C., & Gordon, M. T. (1985). Uncovering rape: The watchdog press and the limits of agenda setting. Public Opinion Quarterly, 49, 19-37.
54. Roberts, J. V., & Doob, A. N. (1990). News media influences on public views of sentencing. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 451-468.
55. Steblay, N. M., Besirevic, J., Fulero, S. M., & Jimenez-Lorente, B. (1999). The effects of pretrial publicity on juror verdicts: A meta-analytic review. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 219-235.
56. Studebaker, C. A., & Penrod, S. D. (1997). Pretrial publicity: The media, the law, and common sense. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3, 428-460.
57. Vallone, R. P., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1985). The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perception and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 577-585.