skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 251528 Find in a Library
Title: Just Science Podcast: Episode 33: 2018 IPTES: Just a Juror's Perception
Author(s): Alicia Wilcox; Heidi Eldridge
Corporate Author: Forensic Technology Center of Excellence (FTCoE)
United States of America
Date Published: February 2018
Page Count: 1
Sponsoring Agency: Forensic Technology Center of Excellence (FTCoE)
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2194
National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
Washington, DC 20531
Grant Number: 2016-MU-BX-K110
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
US Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
810 Seventh Street NW
Washington, DC 20531
United States of America
Document: Audio (iTunes)|Audio (Google Play Music)|HTML
Type: Interview; Report (Grant Sponsored); Report (Technical Assistance)
Format: Audio (Online)
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This podcast episode consists of an interview with Dr. Alicia Wilcox from Husson University and Heidi Eldridge from RTI International, who discuss how visual aids and other communication tactics have helped jurors interpret subject matter presented in expert testimony.
Abstract: Wilcox conducted a study of jurors ‘comprehension of and reliance on testimony by forensic scientists in criminal trials in Maine. Eldridge is familiar with previous research on jurors ‘comprehension of testimony by forensic scientists. They agree that comprehension of testimony by forensic scientists varies among jurors based on their academic and professional backgrounds related to principles of scientific analysis. The focus of the interview is on how the forensic community and court procedures can assist jurors with limited knowledge and experience with the sciences to comprehend the testimony of forensic scientists. Wilcox and Eldridge agreed that forensic scientists who testify about their work in evidence analysis and interpretation are generally untrained in techniques of explaining their findings to jurors who have no background in scientific endeavors. They recommend greater use of visual techniques in explaining forensic techniques and findings. There was also agreement between Wilcox and Eldridge that jurors generally do not comprehend and are not influenced by expert testimony on statistical analysis of the reliability of a forensic scientist’s conclusion about a piece of evidence. Jurors mainly focus on the expert’s overall conclusion about how the evidence either incriminates or exonerates the defendant. Jurors are also influenced by whether the expert testimony is consistent with the narrative of guilt portrayed by the prosecutor using less scientific and more easily understood testimony.
Main Term(s): Forensic sciences
Index Term(s): Expert witnesses; Juror characteristics; Jury decisionmaking; Jury research; NIJ grant-related documents; NIJ Resources; Scientific testimony
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.