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

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 45-67

  Ruva, Christine ^a   McEvoy, Cathy ^a   Bryant, Judith Becker ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COURT; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; GUILT; HOMICIDE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INFORMATION; MALE; MASS MEDIUM; MEMORY; NORMAL HUMAN; PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; VIDEORECORDING;

EID: 33846394461     PISSN: 08884080     EISSN: 10990720     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/acp.1254     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Alderton, S. M., & Frey, L. R. (1983). Effects of reactions to arguments on group outcome: The case of group polarization. Central States Speech Journal, 34, 88-95.
2. Alderton, S. M., & Frey, L. R. (1986). Argumentation in small group decision-making. In R. Y. Hirokawa, & M. S. Poole (Eds.) Communication and group decision making (pp. 157-173). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
3. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality of Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
4. Basden, B. H., Basden, D. R., Bryner, S., & Thomas, R. L., III. (1997). A comparison of group and individual remembering: Does collaboration disrupt retrieval strategies? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 23, 1176-1191.
5. Basden, B. H., Basden, D. R., Thomas, R. L., III., & Souphasith, S. (1998). Memory distortion in group recall. Current Psychology: Developmental, Learning, Personality, 16, 225-246.
6. Berlo, D. K., Lemert, J. B., & Mertz, R. J. (1970). Dimensions for evaluating the acceptability of message sources. Public Opinion Quarterly, 33, 563-578.
7. Bornstein, B. H. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75-92.
8. Bottoms, B. L., & Goodman, G. S. (1994). Perceptions of children's credibility in sexual assault cases. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 702-732.
9. Bourgeois, M. J., Horowitz, I. A., Fosterlee, L., & Graphe, J. (1995). Nominal and interactive groups: Effects of preinstruction and deliberations on decisions and evidence recall in complex trials. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 58-67.
10. Brigham, J. C., & Spier, S. A. (1992). Opinions held by professionals who work with child witnesses. In H. Dent, & R. Flin (Eds.), Children as witnesses (pp. 93-111). Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.
11. Clark, N. K., Stephenson, G. M., & Kniveton, B. H. (1990). Social remembering: Quantitative aspects of individual and collaborative remembering by police officers and students. British Journal of Psychology, 81, 73-94.
12. Clark, N. K., Stephenson, G. M., & Rutter, D. R. (1986). Memory for a complex social discourse: The analysis and prediction of individual and group remembering. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 295-313.
13. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analyses for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Dexter, H. R. (1990). Juror sensitivity to eyewitness identification evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 185-191.
15. Davis, R. W. (1986). Pretrial publicity, the timing of the trial, and mock jurors' decision processes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 590-607.
16. Davis, J. H. (1992). Some compelling intuitions about group consensus decisions, theoretical and empirical research, and interpersonal aggregation phenomena: Selected examples, 1950-1990. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52, 3-38.
17. Davis, J. H., Hulbert, L., Au, W. T., Chen, X., & Zarnoth, P. (1997). Effects of group size and procedural influence on consensus judgments of quantity: The examples of damage award and mock civil juries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1000-1012.
18. Davis, J. H., Spitzer, C. E., Nagao, D. H., & Stasser, G. (1978). Bias in social decisions by individuals and groups: An example from mock juries. In H. Brandstatter, J. H. Davis, & H. Schuler (Eds.), Dynamics of group decisions (pp. 33-52). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
19. 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.
20. Deitz, S. R., & Sissman, P. L. (1984). Investigating jury bias in a child molestation case. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 2, 423-435.
21. Devine, D. J., Clayton, L. D., Dunford, B. B., Seying, R., & Pryce, J. (2001). Jury decision making: 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 7, 622-727.
22. Frost, P., Ingraham, M., & Wilson, B. (2002). Why misinformation is more likely to be recognised over time: A source monitoring account. Memory, 10, 179-185.
23. Goodman, G. S., Golding, J. M., Helgeson, V. S., Haith, M. H., & Michelli, J. (1987). When a child takes the stand. Law and Human Behavior, 11, 27-40.
24. Hartwick, J., Sheppard, B. H., & Davis, J. H. (1982). Group remembering: Research and implications. In R. A. Guzzo (Ed.), Improving decision making in organizations (pp. 41-72). London: Academic Press.
25. Hinz, V. B. (1990). Cognitive and consensus processes in group recognition memory performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 705-718.
26. Hope, L., Memon, A., & McGeorge, P. (2004). Understanding pretrial publicity: Predecisional distorition of evidence by mock jurors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10, 111-119.
27. 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(3), 94-117.
28. Johnson, M. K., Hashtroudi, S., & Lindsay, D. (1993). Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 3-28.
29. Kassin, S. M., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1988). The American jury on trial: Psychological perspectives. Bristol, PA: Taylor and Francis.
30. Kelly, A., Carroll, M., & Mazzoni, G. (2002). Metamemory and reality monitoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 407-428.
31. Kerr, N. (1993). Stochastic models of juror decision making. In R. Hastie (Ed.), Inside the juror: The psychology of juror decision making (pp. 116-135). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
32. Kerr, N. L., Niedermeier, K. E., & Kaplan, M. F. (1999). Bias in jurors vs. bias in juries: New evidence from the SDS perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 80, 70-86.
33. Kramer, G. P., Kerr, N. L., & Carroll, J. S. (1990). Pretrial publicity, judicial remedies, and jury bias. Law and Human Behavior, 14(5), 409-438.
34. Leippe, M., Manion, A., & Romanczyk, A. (1992). Eyewitness persuasion: How and how well do fact finders judge the accuracy of adults' and children's' memory reports. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(2), 181-197.
35. Leippe, M. R., & Romanczyk, A. (1987). Children on the witness stand: A communication/persuasion analysis of jurors' reactions to child witnesses. In S. J. Ceci, M. P. Toglia, & D. F. Ross (Eds.), Children's eyewitness memory (pp. 155-177). New York: Springer-Verlag.
36. Lindsay, D. S. (1994). Memory, source monitoring, and eyewitness testimony. In D. F. Ross, D. J. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Adult eyewitness testimony: Current trends and developments (pp. 27-55). New York: Cambridge University Press.
37. Lindsay, D. S., & Johnson, M. K. (1989). Reality monitoring and suggestibility: Children's ability to discriminate among memories from different sources. In S. J. Ceci, D. F. Ross, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Perspectives on children's testimony (pp. 92-121). New York: Springer-Verlag.
38. Loftus, E. F., & Palmer, J. C. (1974). Reconstruction of automobile destruction: And example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Behavior, 13, 585-589.
39. McCroskey, J. C. (1966). Scales for the measurement of ethos. Speech Monographs, 33, 65-72.
40. McCroskey, J. C., & Young, J. Y. (1981). Ethos and credibility: The construction and its measurement after three decades. Central States Speech Journal, 32, 24-34.
41. McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L., III. (1998). Attempting to avoid illusory memories: Robust false recognition of associates persists under conditions of explicit warnings and immediate testing. Journal of Memory & Language, 39, 508-520.
42. Moran, G., & Cutler, B. L. (1991). The prejudicial impact of pretrial publicity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 345-367.
43. Neuschatz, J. S., Payne, D. G., Lampinen, J. M., Toglia, M. P. (2001). Assessing the effectiveness of warnings and the phenomenological characteristics of false memories. Memory, 9, 53-71.
44. Nigro, G. N., Buckley, M. A., Hill, D. E., & Nelson, J. (1989). When juries "hear" children testify: The effects of eyewitness age and speech style on jurors' perceptions of testimony. In S. J. Ceci, D. F. Ross, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Perspectives on children's testimony (pp. 57-69). New York: Springer-Verlag.
45. 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.
46. 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.
47. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1988). Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14, 521-533.
48. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1993). The story model for juror decision making. In R. Hastie (Ed.), Inside the juror: The psychology of juror decision-making (pp. 192-221). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
49. Pritchard, M. E., & Keenan, J. M. (1999). Memory monitoring in mock jurors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 340-348.
50. Pritchard, M. E., & Keenan, J. M. (2002). Does jury deliberation really improve jurors' memories? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 589-601.
51. Rantzen, A., & Markham, R. (1992). The reversed eyewitness testimony design: More evidence for source monitoring. The Journal of General Psychology, 119(1), 37-43.
52. Ross, D. F., Dunning, D., Toglia, M. P., & Ceci, S. J. (1989). The child in the eyes of the jury: Age stereotypes, communication modality, and mock jurors' perceptions of the child witness. In S. J. Ceci, D. F. Ross, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Perspectives on children's testimony (pp. 37-56). New York: Springer-Verlag.
53. Ruva, C. L., & Bryant, J. B. (2004). The impact of age, speech style, and question form on perceptions of witness credibility and trial outcome. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 1919-1944.
54. Ruva, C. L., Bryant, J. B., & Brannick, M. T. (1996). Development of the adults' general beliefs about children scale for research on witness credibility. Poster presented at the Conference on Human Development, Birmingham, AL.
55. Schmidt, C. W., & Brigham, J. C. (1996). Jurors' perceptions of child victim-witnesses in a simulated sexual abuse trial. Law and Human Behavior, 20(6), 581-606.
56. Seibold, D. R., & Meyers, R. A. (1986). Communication and influence in group decision-making. In R. Y. Hirokawa, & M. S. Poole (Eds.) Communication and group decision making (pp. 133-155). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
57. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 4, 422-445.
58. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 290-312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
59. Stephenson, G. M., Abrams, D., Wagner, W., & Wade, G. (1986). Partners in recall: Collaborative order in the recall of a police interrogation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 341-343.
60. Stephenson, G. M., & Wagner, W. (1989). Origins of the misplaced confidence effect in collaborative recall. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 3, 227-236.
61. Studebaker, C. A., & Penrod, S. D. (1997). Pretrial publicity: The media, the law, and common sense. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 3, 428-460.
62. Tankard, J. W., Jr. Middleton, K., & Rimmer, T. (1978). Compliance with American Bar Association fair trial-free press guidelines. Journalism Quarterly, 464-468.
63. Vollrath, D. A., Sheppard, B. H., Hinsz, V. B., & Davis, J. H. (1989). Memory performance by decision-making groups and individuals. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 43, 289-300.
64. Weingardt, K. R., Toland, H. K., & Loftus, E. F. (1994). Reports of suggested memories: Do people truly believe them. In D. F. Ross, D. J. Read, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Adult eyewitness testimony: Current trends and developments (pp. 3-27). New York: Cambridge University Press.
65. Wells, G. L., Turtle, J. W., & Luus, C. A. E. (1989). The perceived credibility of child witnesses: What happens when they use their own words? In S. J. Ceci, D. F. Ross, & M. P. Toglia (Eds.), Perspectives on children's testimony (pp. 23-36). New York: Springer-Verlag.
66. Yarmey, A. D., & Jones, H. P. (1983). Is the psychology of eyewitness identification a matter of common sense? In S. M. A. Lloyd-Bostock, & B. R. Clifford (Eds.), Evaluating witness evidence (pp. 13-40). Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.
67. Zaragoza, M. S., & Lane, S. M. (1994). Source misattributions and the suggestibility of eyewitness memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 934-945.