Perceived Credibility of Social Media Data as a Collateral Source in Criminal Responsibility Evaluations Using an Experimental Design

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Ashley B. Batastini, M. Vitacco, Ashley C. T. Jones, R. Davis
{"title":"Perceived Credibility of Social Media Data as a Collateral Source in Criminal Responsibility Evaluations Using an Experimental Design","authors":"Ashley B. Batastini, M. Vitacco, Ashley C. T. Jones, R. Davis","doi":"10.1080/14999013.2021.1880504","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Perceived credibility of social media data (i.e., a Twitter post) was compared to more traditional collateral sources in criminal responsibility evaluations using independent samples of laypersons and forensic experts. Overall, results suggested greater skepticism toward social media relative to two other sources, particularly when information suggested a mental illness. Both samples, however, viewed the tweet as potentially useful. Notably, both studies were limited by the use of an experimental design that was intended to capture initial impressions rather than fully mimic standard assessment and courtroom processes. We advocate a cautious but open-minded approach when considering social media data as collateral.","PeriodicalId":14052,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Forensic Mental Health","volume":"20 1","pages":"317 - 332"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14999013.2021.1880504","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Forensic Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14999013.2021.1880504","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract Perceived credibility of social media data (i.e., a Twitter post) was compared to more traditional collateral sources in criminal responsibility evaluations using independent samples of laypersons and forensic experts. Overall, results suggested greater skepticism toward social media relative to two other sources, particularly when information suggested a mental illness. Both samples, however, viewed the tweet as potentially useful. Notably, both studies were limited by the use of an experimental design that was intended to capture initial impressions rather than fully mimic standard assessment and courtroom processes. We advocate a cautious but open-minded approach when considering social media data as collateral.
使用实验设计的社会媒体数据作为刑事责任评估附带来源的感知可信度
在刑事责任评估中,使用外行和法医专家的独立样本,将社交媒体数据(即Twitter帖子)的感知可信度与更传统的附带来源进行了比较。总的来说,结果表明,相对于其他两种来源,人们对社交媒体的怀疑程度更高,尤其是当信息显示出精神疾病时。然而,这两个样本都认为这条推文可能有用。值得注意的是,这两项研究都受到实验设计的限制,实验设计旨在捕捉初步印象,而不是完全模仿标准评估和法庭程序。在将社交媒体数据作为抵押品时,我们提倡谨慎但开放的态度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
7.10%
发文量
24
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信