Studying pretrial publicity effects: New methods for improving ecological validity and testing external validity

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 19-41

  Studebaker, Christina A ^a,e   Robbennolt, Jennifer K ^a,b   Penrod, Steven D ^a   Pathak Sharma, Maithilee K ^a,c   Groscup, Jennifer L ^a   Devenport, Jennifer L ^a,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

^c R and D Strategic Solutions   (United States)

^d CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e Federal Judicial Center   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; COURT; DATA ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; E-MAIL; ECOLOGY; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERNET; MALE; MASS MEDIUM; PUBLIC OPINION; QUESTIONNAIRE; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; CRIMINAL LAW; EXPLOSION; HOMICIDE; INFORMATION PROCESSING; LEGAL ASPECT; PUBLICATION; RESEARCH; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; TERRORISM; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; CRIMINAL LAW; DATA COLLECTION; EXPLOSIONS; FEMALE; HOMICIDE; HUMANS; INTERNET; MALE; NEWSPAPERS; OKLAHOMA; PREJUDICE; PUBLIC OPINION; RESEARCH; TERRORISM;

EID: 0036481727     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1013877108082     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Anonymous (2001, February 6). Internet Users Will Surpass 1 Billion in 2005 [On-line]. Available: http://www.etforecasts.com/pr/pr201.htm
2. Bornstein, B. H. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75-92.
3. Bowker, D. K. (1999). Constructing the client-computer interface: Guidelines for design and implementation of Web-based surveys (Summary Report No. 95-59). Pullman, WA: Washington State University, Social & Economic Sciences Research Center.
4. Bray, R. M., & Kerr, N. L. (1979). Use of the simulation method in the study of jury behavior. Law and Human Behavior, 3, 107-119.
5. Bray, R. M., & Kerr, N. L. (1982). Methodological considerations in the study of the psychology of the courtroom. In N. L. Kerr, & R. M. Bray (Eds.), The psychology of the courtroom. New York: Academic Press.
6. Bruschke, J., & Loges, W. E. (1999). Relationship between pretrial publicity and trial outcomes. Journal of Communication, 49, 104-120.
7. Carroll, J. S., Kerr, N. L., Alfini, J. J., Weaver, F. M., MacCoun, R. J., & Feldman, V. (1986). Free press and fair trial: The role of behavioral research. Law and Human Behavior, 10, 187-201.
8. Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1977). Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
9. Fulero, S. M. (1987). The role of behavioral research in the free press/fair trial controversy. Law and Human Behavior, 11, 259-264.
10. GVU's WWW User Surveys home page. (2001, November 13). Retrieved from http://www.cc.gatech.edu/ gvu/user_surveys/
11. GVU's tenth WWW user survey. (2001, November 13). Retrieved from http://www.gvu.gatech.edu/ user_surveys/survey-1998-10/
12. Hale v. Gibson, 227 F.3d 1298 (2000).
13. Helle, S. (1997). Publicity does not equal prejudice. Illinois Bar Journal, 85, 16-21.
14. Hsu, J., Fan, J., & Coyle, R. (2000, April 2). Weekly at-home & at-work ratings from Nielsen// NetRatings: Data for Monday, March 27 through Sunday, April 2, 2000. [On-line]. Available: http:// www.nielsennetratings.com/ press_releases/pr_000407.htm
15. Imrich, D. J., Mullin, C., & Linz, D. (1995). Measuring the extent of prejudicial pretrial publicity in major American newspapers: A content analysis. Journal of Communication, 45, 91-117.
16. Kerr, N. L. (1994). The effects of pretrial publicity on jurors. Judicature, 78, 120-127.
17. Konecni, V. J., & Ebbesen, E. B. (1979). External validity of research in legal psychology. Law and Human Behavior, 3, 39-70.
18. Lewis, M. (2000, November 5). The Two-Bucks-a-Minute Democracy, The New York Times, p. 65.
19. Lockhart v. McCree, 106 S.Ct. 1758 (1986).
20. Nietzel, M. T. McCarthy, D. M., & Kern, M. J. (1999). Juries: The current state of the empirical literature. In R. Roesch, S. D. Hart, & J. R. P. Ogloff (Eds.), Psychology and law: The state of the discipline. New York: Plenum.
21. O'Neil, K. M., & Penrod, S. D. (2001). Methodological variables in Web-based research that may affect results: Sample type, monetary incentives, and personal information. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 33, 226-233.
22. O'Neil, K., Penrod, S., & Ray, R. (2000, March). The validity of conducting research over the World Wide Web: Experiences from psycholegal research. New Orleans, LA: American Psychology-Law Society.
23. Penrod, S. D., & O'Neil, K. M. (2000, November). Investigating the validity of a new method for jury research: Imposing the death penalty over the World-Wide Web. New Orleans, LA: Society for Computers in Psychology.
24. Pitkow, J., & Kehoe, C. (1995). Results from the third World-Wide Web user survey. [On-line]. Available: http://www.cc.gatech.edu/gvu/ user_surveys/papers/survey_3_paper.html
25. Pitkow, J., & Recker, M. M. (1994). Results from the first World-Wide Web user survey. Journal of Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 27, 243-258.
26. Pitkow, J., & Recker, M. M. (1995). Using the Web as a survey tool: Results from the second World-Wide Web user survey. Journal of Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 27, 809-822.
27. Robbennolt, J. K., MacCoun, R. I. & Darley, J. M. (2000, March). Punitive damages: To the plaintiff or to the state? New Orleans, LA: American Psychology-Law Society.
28. 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, 219-236.
29. Studebaker, C. A., & Penrod, S. D. (1997). Pretrial publicity: The media, the law, and common sense. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3, 428-460.
30. Studebaker, C. A., Robbennolt, J. K., Pathak-Sharma, M. K., & Penrod, S. D. (2000). Assessing pretrial publicity effects: Integrating content analytic results. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 317-336.
31. Swoboda, W. J., Muhlberger, N., & Schneeweib, S. (1997). Internet surveys by direct mailing: An innovative way of collecting data. Social Science Computer Review, 15, 242-255.
32. Weiten, W., & Diamond, S. S. (1979). A critical review of the jury simulation paradigm. Law and Human Behavior, 3, 71-93.
33. Wilson, J. R., & Bornstein, B. H. (1998). Methodological considerations in pretrial publicity research: Is the medium the message? Law and Human Behavior, 22, 585-597.