Abstract
The effect of pretrial publicity (PTP) on juror verdicts was examined through a meta-analysis of 44 empirical tests representing 5,755 subjects. In support of the hypothesis, subjects exposed to negative PTP were significantly more likely to judge the defendant guilty compared to subjects exposed to less or no negative PTP. Greater effect sizes were produced in studies which included a pretrial verdict assessment, use of the potential juror pool as subjects, multiple points of negative information included in the PTP, real PTP, crimes of murder, sexual abuse, or drugs, and greater length of time between PTP exposure and judgment. The effect was attenuated with student subjects, use of general rather than specific PTP information, certain types of PTP content, a post-trial predeliberation verdict, and specific types of crimes. Implications of these results are discussed, along with possible mechanisms that underlie the PTP effect.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Bennett, W. L., & Feldman, M. S. (1981). Reconstructing reality in the courtroom: Justice and judgment in American culture. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Carroll, J. S., Kerr, N. L., Alfini, J. J, Weaver, F. M., MacCoun, R. J., & Feldman, V. (1986). Free press and fair trial: The role of behavioral research. Law and Human Behavior, 10, 187-201.
Costantini, E., & King, J. (1980/81). The partial juror: Correlates and causes of prejudgment. Law and Society Review, 15, 9-40.
Costley, C. L. (1988). Meta-analysis of involvement research. Advances in Consumer Research, 15, 554-562.
Davis, R. W. (1986). Pretrial publicity, the timing of the trial, and mock jurors' decision processes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 590-607.
DeLuca, A. J. (1979). Tipping the scales of justice: The effects of pretrial publicity. Unpublished master's thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, IA.
Dexter, H. R., Cutler, B. L., & Moran, G. (1992). A test of voir dire as a remedy for the prejudicial effects of pretrial publicity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 819-832.
Greene, E., & Wade, R. (1988). Of private talk and public print: General pretrial publicity and juror decision making. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 2, 123-135.
Fulero, S. M. (1987). The role of behavioral research in the free press/fair trial controversy: Another view. Law and Human Behavior, 11, 259-264.
Fulero, S., Olsen-Fulero, L., & Wulff, K. (1991, June). Stability and structure of mediating story variables in rape juror decision making. Paper presented at the American Psychological Society convention, Washington, D. C.
Fulero, S., & Penrod, S. (1990). The myths and realities of attorney jury selection folklore and scientific jury selection: What works? Ohio Northern Law Review, 17, 229-253.
Hastie, R., Penrod, S., & Pennington, N. (1983). Inside the jury. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Hoiberg, B., & Stires, L. (1973). The effect of several types of pretrial publicity on the guilty attributions of simulated jurors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 3, 267-275.
Hvistendahl, J. K. (1979). The effect of placement of biasing information. Journalism Quarterly, 56, 863-865.
Kovera, M. (1994). The media and allegations of sexual misconduct: The effect of agenda-setting on appraisals of credibility. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.
Kramer, G. P., & Kerr, N. L. (1989). Laboratory simulation and bias in the study of juror behavior: A methodological note. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 89-100.
Kramer, G. P., Kerr, N. L., & Carroll, J. S. (1990). Pretrial publicity, judicial remedies, and jury bias. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 409-438.
Linz, D. & Penrod, S. (1992). Exploring the First and Sixth Amendments: Pretrial publicity and jury decision making. In D. K. Kagehiro & W. S. Laufer (Eds.), Handbook of psychology and law (pp. 3-20). New York: Springer-Verlag.
McGuire, W. J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (pp. 233-346). New York: Random House.
Moore, A. J. (1989). Trial by schema: Cognitive filters in the courtroom. UCLA Law Review, 37, 273-341.
Moran, G., & Cutler, B. L. (1991). The prejudicial impact of pretrial publicity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 345-367.
Moran, G., & Cutler, B. L. (1997). Bogus publicity items and the contingency between awareness and media-induced pretrial prejudice. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 339-344.
Mullin, C., Imrich, D., & Linz, D. (1989, August). The effects of date-rape information and prejudicial and nonprejudicial pretrial publicity on jury decision making in a sexual assault case. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association meeting, New Orleans, LA.
Nelson, M. D. (1972). Free press-fair trial: The effects of “sensational” and “non-sensational” pretrial news stories and of a judge's admonition upon “juror” and “non-juror” guilt assessment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Note. (1846). Trial by jury in New York. Law Reports, 9, 193-201.
Ogloff, J. R. P., & Vidmar, N. (1994). The impact of pretrial publicity on jurors. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 507-525.
Olsen-Fulero, L., & Fulero, S. (1997). Common sense rape judgments: An empathy-complexity theory of rape juror story making. Psychology, Public Policy, and the Law, 3, 402-427.
Olsen-Fulero, L., Fulero, S., & Wulff, K. (1989, August). Who did what to whom? Modeling rape jurors' cognitive processes. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association convention, New Orleans, LA.
Otto, A., Penrod, S., & Dexter, H. (1994). The biasing impact of pretrial publicity on juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 453-462.
Otto, A., Penrod, S., & Hirt, E. (1990) The influence of pretrial publicity on juror judgments in a civil case. Unpublished manuscript.
Padawer-Singer, A., & Barton, A. H. (1975). The impact of pretrial publicity on jurors' verdicts. In R. J. Simon (Ed.), The jury system in America: A critical overview (pp. 123-139). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Pennington, N. (1981). Causal reasoning and decision making: The case of juror decisions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1981, August). Juror decision making: Story structure and verdict choice. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association convention, Los Angeles, CA.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1986). Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 242-258.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1988). Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 521-533.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1990). Practical implications of psychological research on juror and jury decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 90-105.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1991). A cognitive theory of juror decision making: The story model. Cardozo Law Review, 13, 519-557.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 189-206.
Polvi, N., Jack, L., Lyon, D. Laird, P., & Ogloff, J. (1996). Mock juror's verdicts in a child sexual abuse case: The effects of pretrial publicity. Paper presented at American Psychology-Law Society Conference, Hilton Head, S.C.
Riedel, R. (1973). Effects of pretrial publicity on male and female jurors and judges in a mock rape trial. Psychological Reports, 73, 819-832.
Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Simon, R. J. (1966). Murder, juries, and the press. Trans-Action, 1966 (May–June), 64-65.
Simon, R. J., & Eimermann, T. (1971). The jury finds not guilty: Another look at media influence on the jury. Journalism Quarterly, 48, 343-344.
Smith, V. L. (1991). Prototypes in the courtroom: Lay representations of legal concepts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 857-872.
Smith, V. L. (1993). When prior knowledge and law collide: Helping jurors use the law. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 507-536.
Steblay, N. M. (1992). A meta-analytic review of the weapon-focus effect. Law and Human Behavior, 16, 413-424.
Steblay, N. M. (1997). Social influence in eyewitness recall: A meta-analytic review of lineup instruction effects. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 283-297.
Studebaker, C. A., & Penrod, S. D. (1997). Pretrail publicity: The media, the law and common sense. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 3, 428-460.
Sue, S., Smith, R. E., & Gilbert, R. (1974). Biasing effects of pretrial publicity on judicial decisions. Journal of Criminal Justice, 2, 163-171.
Sue, S., Smith, R. E., & Pedroza, G. (1975). Authoritarianism, pretrial publicity and awareness of bias in simulated jurors. Psychological Reports, 37, 1299-1302.
Tans, M., & Chaffee, S. (1966). Pretrial publicity and juror prejudice. Journalism Quarterly, 43, 647-654.
Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. M. (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review, 80, 352-373.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Steblay, N.M., Besirevic, J., Fulero, S.M. et al. The Effects of Pretrial Publicity on Juror Verdicts: A Meta-Analytic Review. Law Hum Behav 23, 219–235 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022325019080
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022325019080