First impressions from the jury box: how the length of expert testimony influences mock trial deliberations

Show simple item record

dc.contributor Prentice-Dunn, Steven
dc.contributor Shealy, R. Clayton
dc.contributor.advisor Brodsky, Stanley L.
dc.contributor.author Titcomb, Caroline Richards
dc.date.accessioned 2017-03-01T14:37:36Z
dc.date.available 2017-03-01T14:37:36Z
dc.date.issued 2010
dc.identifier.other u0015_0000001_0000496
dc.identifier.other Titcomb_alatus_0004M_10584
dc.identifier.uri https://ir.ua.edu/handle/123456789/1001
dc.description Electronic Thesis or Dissertation
dc.description.abstract The present study examined the influence that a juror's first impressions of an expert witness might have on two outcomes: judgments of the witness' credibility, and verdict decisions in a criminal case involving a Not Guilty by Insanity (NGRI) defense. This was the first study to use "thin slice" methodology to manipulate time exposed to expert testimony and assess reliability of witness credibility ratings over time. This study also examined the degree to which these impressions influence the relationship between juror opinions and jury decision-making. A 2 (non-deliberating vs. deliberating jury) X 3 (observing 30 seconds, 5 minutes, or 10 minutes of expert witness testimony) between subjects design was implemented. Participants (N = 188, 30 mock juries) viewed a videotaped presentation of testimony from an actor portraying a forensic mental health professional called on by the defense. Mock juror characteristics, responses to a thought listing measure, and transcriptions from the videotaped jury deliberations were coded for exploratory analysis. Primary results, obtained via Hierarchical Linear Mixed Modeling to account for the random effect of group, were supported by jury-level analysis. Despite support for the accuracy of "thin slice" judgments in the literature, results found that jurors in the 30 second condition judged the expert as significantly less credible in this study. Results did not support the anticipated leniency shift in juries post-deliberation, and instead, yielded a significant two-way interaction on verdict for the 30 second group, such that non-deliberating jurors were more lenient than deliberating jurors. Implications for understanding how impressions of expert witness testimony translate from the juror to the deliberation room are discussed, with particular attention to cases with an increased likelihood of bias against the NGRI defense.
dc.format.extent 110 p.
dc.format.medium electronic
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf
dc.language English
dc.language.iso en_US
dc.publisher University of Alabama Libraries
dc.relation.ispartof The University of Alabama Electronic Theses and Dissertations
dc.relation.ispartof The University of Alabama Libraries Digital Collections
dc.relation.hasversion born digital
dc.rights All rights reserved by the author unless otherwise indicated.
dc.subject.other Psychology
dc.subject.other Social Psychology
dc.title First impressions from the jury box: how the length of expert testimony influences mock trial deliberations
dc.type thesis
dc.type text
etdms.degree.department University of Alabama. Dept. of Psychology
etdms.degree.discipline Psychology
etdms.degree.grantor The University of Alabama
etdms.degree.level master's
etdms.degree.name M.A.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace


Browse

My Account