Technology on trial: facilitative and prejudicial effects of computer-generated animations on jurors’ legal judgments

IF 1.1 4区 社会学 Q3 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Emma Rempel, Tara M. Burke
{"title":"Technology on trial: facilitative and prejudicial effects of computer-generated animations on jurors’ legal judgments","authors":"Emma Rempel, Tara M. Burke","doi":"10.1080/1068316X.2022.2041014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The current study explored how a computer-generated animation (CGA) illustrating a defendant’s version of events affected jurors’ judgments in a mock second-degree murder trial. We hypothesized that mock jurors who viewed a CGA illustrating the defendant’s testimony would be more likely to acquit compared to those who viewed static visual images or did not view a visual aid, and that this effect would occur regardless of whether the narrative depicted in the CGA was corroborated by pertinent testimonial evidence. In this 2 (testimony congruence: incongruent vs. congruent) x 3 (testimony modality: no-aid vs. static visual aid vs. computer-generated animation) between-subjects design, undergraduate students (N = 238) read a transcript from a fictitious trial and heard the defendant’s testimony in one of three modalities. Across congruence conditions, participants were significantly more likely to acquit the defendant when his testimony was accompanied by a CGA (OR = 5.08), compared to a static visual aid or with no-aid. Our results suggest that CGAs may have a disproportionate impact on jurors’ judgments compared to traditional forms of demonstrative evidence. Whether this impact is facilitative or prejudicial, however, depends on whether the content of the animation is congruent or incongruent with other case evidence.","PeriodicalId":47845,"journal":{"name":"Psychology Crime & Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology Crime & Law","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2022.2041014","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT The current study explored how a computer-generated animation (CGA) illustrating a defendant’s version of events affected jurors’ judgments in a mock second-degree murder trial. We hypothesized that mock jurors who viewed a CGA illustrating the defendant’s testimony would be more likely to acquit compared to those who viewed static visual images or did not view a visual aid, and that this effect would occur regardless of whether the narrative depicted in the CGA was corroborated by pertinent testimonial evidence. In this 2 (testimony congruence: incongruent vs. congruent) x 3 (testimony modality: no-aid vs. static visual aid vs. computer-generated animation) between-subjects design, undergraduate students (N = 238) read a transcript from a fictitious trial and heard the defendant’s testimony in one of three modalities. Across congruence conditions, participants were significantly more likely to acquit the defendant when his testimony was accompanied by a CGA (OR = 5.08), compared to a static visual aid or with no-aid. Our results suggest that CGAs may have a disproportionate impact on jurors’ judgments compared to traditional forms of demonstrative evidence. Whether this impact is facilitative or prejudicial, however, depends on whether the content of the animation is congruent or incongruent with other case evidence.
审判技术:计算机动画对陪审员法律判决的促进和偏见作用
当前的研究探讨了在模拟二级谋杀审判中,计算机生成的动画(CGA)如何说明被告的事件版本影响陪审员的判断。我们假设,与那些观看静态视觉图像或没有观看视觉辅助的模拟陪审员相比,观看了说明被告证词的CGA的模拟陪审员更有可能无罪释放,并且无论CGA中描述的叙述是否得到相关证词证据的证实,这种效果都会发生。在这个2(证词一致性:不一致性vs.一致性)x 3(证词形式:无辅助、静态视觉辅助、计算机生成动画)的被试间设计中,本科生(N = 238)阅读了一份虚构审判的文字记录,并以三种方式之一听取了被告的证词。在一致性条件下,当被告的证词伴随着CGA (OR = 5.08)时,与静态视觉辅助或无辅助相比,参与者更有可能无罪释放被告。我们的研究结果表明,与传统形式的证明证据相比,CGAs可能对陪审员的判断产生不成比例的影响。然而,这种影响是促进还是偏见,取决于动画的内容是否与其他案例证据一致。
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
3.10
自引率
7.10%
发文量
83
期刊介绍: This journal promotes the study and application of psychological approaches to crime, criminal and civil law, and the influence of law on behavior. The content includes the aetiology of criminal behavior and studies of different offender groups; crime detection, for example, interrogation and witness testimony; courtroom studies in areas such as jury behavior, decision making, divorce and custody, and expert testimony; behavior of litigants, lawyers, judges, and court officers, both in and outside the courtroom; issues of offender management including prisons, probation, and rehabilitation initiatives; and studies of public, including the victim, reactions to crime and the legal process.
×
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