Pretrial publicity and civil cases: A two-way street?

Law and Human Behavior

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 3-17

  Bornstein, Brian H ^a,b   Whisenhunt, Brooke L ^a   Nemeth, Robert J ^a   Dunaway, Deborah L ^a  

^a LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COLLEGE STUDENT; COURT; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LAW SUIT; LEGAL LIABILITY; MALE; MASS MEDIUM; OVARY CANCER; RATING SCALE; CASE REPORT; CHEMICAL INDUSTRY; CHEMICALLY INDUCED DISORDER; CIVIL RIGHTS; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; HAZARDOUS WASTE; LEGAL ASPECT; OVARY TUMOR; PUBLIC OPINION; PUBLICATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY;

KETAMINE;

ADULT; CHEMICAL INDUSTRY; CIVIL RIGHTS; FEMALE; HAZARDOUS WASTE; HUMANS; KETAMINE; LIABILITY, LEGAL; MALE; NEWSPAPERS; OVARIAN NEOPLASMS; PREJUDICE; PUBLIC OPINION;

EID: 0036484445     PISSN: 01477307     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1013825124011     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Bailis, D. S., & MacCoun, R. J. (1996). Estimating liability risks with the media as your guide: A content analysis of media coverage of tort litigation. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 419-429.
2. Bornstein, B. H. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75-91.
3. Bornstein, B. H., & Rajki, M. (1994). Extra-legal factors and product liability: The influence of mock jurors' demographic characteristics and intuitions about the cause of an injury. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 12, 127-147.
4. 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.
5. Chapman, G. B., & Bornstein, B. H. (1996). The more you ask for, the more you get: Anchoring in personal injury verdicts. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 519-540.
6. Dexter, H. R., Cutler, B. L., & Moran, G. (1992). A test of voir dire as a remedy for the prejudicial effects of pretrial publicity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 819-832.
7. Diamond, S. S. (1997). Illuminations and shadows from jury simulations. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 561-571.
8. Fain, S., McCloskey, A. L., & Tomlinson, T. M. (1997). Can the jury disregard that information? The use of suspicion to reduce the prejudicial effects of pretrial publicity and inadmissable testimony. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1215-1226.
9. ForsterLee, L., Horowitz, I. A., & Bourgeois, M. J. (1993). Juror competence in civil trials: Effects of preinstruction and evidence technicality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 14-21.
10. Fulero, S. (1987). The role of behavioral research in the free press/ fair trial controversy: Another view. Law and Human Behavior, 11, 259-264.
11. Greene, E., & Dodge, M. (1995). The influence of prior record evidence on juror decision making. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 67-78.
12. Greene, E., & Wade, R. (1987). Of private talk and public print: General pre-trial publicity and juror decision-making. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 1, 1-13.
13. 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, 94-117.
14. Kagehiro, D. K. (1990). Defining the standard of proof in jury instructions. Psychological Science, 1, 194-200.
15. Kaplan, S. M., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1979). On the requirements of proof: The timing of judicial instructions and mock juror verdicts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1877-1887.
16. Kassin, S. M., & Sommers, S. R. (1997). Inadmissible testimony, instructions to disregard, and the jury: Substantive versus procedural considerations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1046-1054.
17. Kerr, N. L., Kramer, G. P., Carroll, J. S., & Alfini, J. (1991). On the effectiveness of voir dire in criminal cases with prejudicial pretrial publicity: An empirical study. American University Law Review, 40, 665-701.
18. Kline, F. G. & Jess, P. H. (1966). Prejudicial publicity: Its effect on law school mock juries. Journalism Quarterly, 43, 113-116.
19. Kramer, G. P., & Kerr, N. L. (1989). Laboratory simulation and bias in the study of juror behavior: A methodological note. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 89-99.
20. Kramer, G. P., Kerr, N. L., & Carroll, J. S. (1990). Pretrial publicity, judicial remedies, and jury bias. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 409-438.
21. Landsman, S., & Rakos, R. F. (1994). A preliminary inquiry into the effect of potentially biasing information on judges and jurors in civil litigation. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 12, 113-126.
22. Linz, D., & Penrod, S. (1992). Exploring the First and Sixth Amendments: Pretrial publicity and jury decision making. In D. K. Kagehiro & W. S. Laufer (Eds.), Handbook of psychology and law (pp. 1-20). New York: Springer-Verlag.
23. Moran, G., & Cutler, B. L. (1991). The prejudicial impact of pretrial publicity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 345-367.
24. 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.
25. Ogloff, J. R. P., & Vidmar, N. (1994). The impact of pretrial publicity on jurors: A study to compare the relative effects of television and print media in a child sex abuse case. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 507-525.
26. Otto, A. L., Penrod, S. D., & Dexter, H. R. (1994). The biasing impact of pretrial publicity on juror judgements. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 453-469.
27. Smith, V. L. (1991). Impact of pretrial instruction on jurors' information processing and decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 220-228.
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, 219-235.
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. Sue, S., Smith, R. E., & Gilbert, R. (1974). Biasing effects of pretrial publicity on judicial decisions. Journal of Criminal Justice, 2, 163-171.
31. Tanford, S., & Cox, M. (1988). The effects of impeachment evidence and limiting instructions on individual and group decision making. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 477-497.
32. Thompson, W. C., Fong, G. T., & Rosenhan, D. C. (1981). Inadmissible evidence and juror verdicts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 453-463.
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.