The proposed research is designed to investigate the influence of pre-trial publicity (PTP) as well as post-venire publicity (PVP) on juror decision making using a novel research methodology. Concern has long been expressed about the possibility that pretrial publicity could compromise the rights of parties to a fair trial and research to date has focused entirely on the effects of PTP. Another factor that could potentially bias jurors is post-venire publicity (PVP). PVP refers to publicity related to a trial that seated jurors may be exposed to, wittingly or unwittingly. PVP has been a concern in the courts and the basis for a number of appellate rulings. The proposed study will examine the influence of PTP/PVP within the theoretical frameworks of ?framing? research and ?predecisional distortion.? It is proposed that depending on the media frame jurors are exposed to ? a pro-prosecution frame, or a pro-defense frame, their perceptions and inferences will be distorted in direction of the favored party. This has significant legal implications as many news media sources are substantially biased in one direction or the other and exposure could influence decision making. The study will also examine the medium (print versus video) via which the information is disseminated, as well as the amount of PTP. The study will employ a shadow juror methodology where participants acting as mock jurors will be exposed to trial evidence as it emerges from an actual trial. It will be conducted online with participants in the venue in which the trial is to take place as well as participants in a remote, potential change-of-venue location. The study will be conducted in 6 sessions. Session 1 will be the exposure to the PTP, session 2 will be vior dire questions and opening statements, session 3 will be prosecution testimony, session 4 will be prosecution and defense testimony, session 5 will be defense testimony, and session 6 will be closing arguments, and judge?s instructions. Participants will be sent condensed trial testimony and asked to render opinions at multiple points along the way as well as ultimate judgments. This study has a number of implications for the legal system. With a better understanding of how external publicity operates, traditional safeguards such as continuances, extended voir dire, jury deliberations, and judicial instructions, which have been found ineffective in the past, may be bolstered. The enhanced external validity of this study could lead to greater acceptance of psycho-legal research in the courtroom. If jurors are indeed influenced by the information they are exposed to during their decision-making process, then a policy case could be made for procedural changes in the court room, including, but not limited to, extended voir dire regarding publicity exposure, granting of change of venue requests in appropriate situations, and the need for enhanced sequestering of juries in high profile cases. The study will engage a number of undergraduate and gradate level research assistants and provide them with a research opportunity. The primary site for the research is John Jay College-CUNY which has an extremely diverse and ethnic student body. The results of this study will be presented at National Conferences such as the annual meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society. Additionally, they will be submitted for publication at leading journals in the field.
