Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorBonito, Josephen
dc.contributor.authorStaggs, Sarah Marie
dc.creatorStaggs, Sarah Marieen
dc.date.accessioned2017-09-06T16:52:48Z
dc.date.available2017-09-06T16:52:48Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/625459
dc.description.abstractThis study addresses individual and group-level effects of jury deliberation and decision making. Using a real case, this study tests pretrial publicity (PTP) effects over time, starting in the pretrial phase and evaluating for media effects throughout the mock-jury decision making process. The sample was composed of mock-jurors (N = 49 deliberating groups of five/six persons). Results address (1) a primacy effect of PTP exposure over time and general perceptions associated with the PTP exposure, (2) attributions of individual cognitive story and verdict preference confidence, and (3) juror- and jury-level characteristics associated with deliberation and communicative influence. Results reveal that the order in which participants saw PTP had differing effects on individual pre-deliberation decision making, but had no significant differing effects on final verdict decisions across groups. The only juror characteristic that had significant effects on the deliberation were perceived communicative influence, perceived participation, need for cognition, and motivation to process and discuss case evidence. In terms of discussing PTP in the deliberation, the only aggregated group effect on the verdict was trust in the jury system. Past research suggests that juries are formed to make unbiased decisions (Gastil, 2008), and in this case, jury deliberation potentially attenuated the presence of media bias.
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.en
dc.subjectdecision makingen
dc.subjectinfluenceen
dc.subjectjuryen
dc.subjectmediaen
dc.subjectpretrial publicityen
dc.subjectsmall groupen
dc.titleEvaluating the Effects of Pretrial Publicity on Mock-Jury Deliberationsen_US
dc.typetexten
dc.typeElectronic Dissertationen
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Arizonaen
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen
dc.contributor.committeememberBonito, Josephen
dc.contributor.committeememberSegrin, Chrisen
dc.contributor.committeememberStevens Aubrey, Jenniferen
thesis.degree.disciplineGraduate Collegeen
thesis.degree.disciplineCommunicationen
thesis.degree.namePh.D.en
refterms.dateFOA2018-06-05T23:25:46Z
html.description.abstractThis study addresses individual and group-level effects of jury deliberation and decision making. Using a real case, this study tests pretrial publicity (PTP) effects over time, starting in the pretrial phase and evaluating for media effects throughout the mock-jury decision making process. The sample was composed of mock-jurors (N = 49 deliberating groups of five/six persons). Results address (1) a primacy effect of PTP exposure over time and general perceptions associated with the PTP exposure, (2) attributions of individual cognitive story and verdict preference confidence, and (3) juror- and jury-level characteristics associated with deliberation and communicative influence. Results reveal that the order in which participants saw PTP had differing effects on individual pre-deliberation decision making, but had no significant differing effects on final verdict decisions across groups. The only juror characteristic that had significant effects on the deliberation were perceived communicative influence, perceived participation, need for cognition, and motivation to process and discuss case evidence. In terms of discussing PTP in the deliberation, the only aggregated group effect on the verdict was trust in the jury system. Past research suggests that juries are formed to make unbiased decisions (Gastil, 2008), and in this case, jury deliberation potentially attenuated the presence of media bias.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
azu_etd_15620_sip1_m.pdf
Size:
1.332Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record