How video image size interacts with evidence strength, defendant emotion, and the defendant-victim relationship to alter perceptions of the defendant

Wendy P. Heath, Bruce D. Grannemann

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Courtroom video presentations can range from images on small screens installed in the jury box to images on courtroom video monitors or projection screens. Does video image size affect jurors' perceptions of information presented during trials? To investigate this we manipulated video image size as well as defendant emotion level presented during testimony (low, moderate), the defendant-victim relationship (spouses, strangers), and the strength of the evidence (weak, strong). Participants (N=263) read a case and trial summary, watched video of defendant testimony, and then answered a questionnaire. Larger screens generally accentuated what was presented (e.g., made stronger evidence seem stronger and weaker evidence seem weaker), acting mainly upon trial outcome variables (e.g., verdict). Non-trial outcomes (e.g., defendant credibility) were generally affected by defendant emotion level and the defendant-victim relationship. Researchers and attorneys presenting video images need to recognize that respondents may evaluate videotaped trial evidence differently as a function of how video evidence is presented.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)496-507
Number of pages12
JournalBehavioral Sciences and the Law
Volume32
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Emotions
emotion
video
Lawyers
Spouses
evidence
Research Personnel
testimony
Surveys and Questionnaires
spouse
credibility
projection
questionnaire

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

How video image size interacts with evidence strength, defendant emotion, and the defendant-victim relationship to alter perceptions of the defendant. / Heath, Wendy P.; Grannemann, Bruce D.

In: Behavioral Sciences and the Law, Vol. 32, No. 4, 2014, p. 496-507.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9a49457c70224f92b01cc504406eef6f,
title = "How video image size interacts with evidence strength, defendant emotion, and the defendant-victim relationship to alter perceptions of the defendant",
abstract = "Courtroom video presentations can range from images on small screens installed in the jury box to images on courtroom video monitors or projection screens. Does video image size affect jurors' perceptions of information presented during trials? To investigate this we manipulated video image size as well as defendant emotion level presented during testimony (low, moderate), the defendant-victim relationship (spouses, strangers), and the strength of the evidence (weak, strong). Participants (N=263) read a case and trial summary, watched video of defendant testimony, and then answered a questionnaire. Larger screens generally accentuated what was presented (e.g., made stronger evidence seem stronger and weaker evidence seem weaker), acting mainly upon trial outcome variables (e.g., verdict). Non-trial outcomes (e.g., defendant credibility) were generally affected by defendant emotion level and the defendant-victim relationship. Researchers and attorneys presenting video images need to recognize that respondents may evaluate videotaped trial evidence differently as a function of how video evidence is presented.",
author = "Heath, {Wendy P.} and Grannemann, {Bruce D.}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1002/bsl.2120",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "496--507",
journal = "Behavioral Sciences and the Law",
issn = "0735-3936",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How video image size interacts with evidence strength, defendant emotion, and the defendant-victim relationship to alter perceptions of the defendant

AU - Heath, Wendy P.

AU - Grannemann, Bruce D.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Courtroom video presentations can range from images on small screens installed in the jury box to images on courtroom video monitors or projection screens. Does video image size affect jurors' perceptions of information presented during trials? To investigate this we manipulated video image size as well as defendant emotion level presented during testimony (low, moderate), the defendant-victim relationship (spouses, strangers), and the strength of the evidence (weak, strong). Participants (N=263) read a case and trial summary, watched video of defendant testimony, and then answered a questionnaire. Larger screens generally accentuated what was presented (e.g., made stronger evidence seem stronger and weaker evidence seem weaker), acting mainly upon trial outcome variables (e.g., verdict). Non-trial outcomes (e.g., defendant credibility) were generally affected by defendant emotion level and the defendant-victim relationship. Researchers and attorneys presenting video images need to recognize that respondents may evaluate videotaped trial evidence differently as a function of how video evidence is presented.

AB - Courtroom video presentations can range from images on small screens installed in the jury box to images on courtroom video monitors or projection screens. Does video image size affect jurors' perceptions of information presented during trials? To investigate this we manipulated video image size as well as defendant emotion level presented during testimony (low, moderate), the defendant-victim relationship (spouses, strangers), and the strength of the evidence (weak, strong). Participants (N=263) read a case and trial summary, watched video of defendant testimony, and then answered a questionnaire. Larger screens generally accentuated what was presented (e.g., made stronger evidence seem stronger and weaker evidence seem weaker), acting mainly upon trial outcome variables (e.g., verdict). Non-trial outcomes (e.g., defendant credibility) were generally affected by defendant emotion level and the defendant-victim relationship. Researchers and attorneys presenting video images need to recognize that respondents may evaluate videotaped trial evidence differently as a function of how video evidence is presented.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84905918302&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84905918302&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/bsl.2120

DO - 10.1002/bsl.2120

M3 - Article

C2 - 24715347

AN - SCOPUS:84905918302

VL - 32

SP - 496

EP - 507

JO - Behavioral Sciences and the Law

JF - Behavioral Sciences and the Law

SN - 0735-3936

IS - 4

ER -