THE METHODOLOGY USED FOR THESE STUDIES INVOLVED REENACTING TRIALS IN THE PRESENCE OF ACTUAL JURORS DESPITE EXISTING THEORETICAL CRITICISM OF SIMULATIONS AND REPLICATIONS IN SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH. A DEGREE OF REALISM WAS RETAINED TOGETHER WITH EXPERIMENTAL CONTROLS BY USING TRANSCRIPTS OF ACTUAL TRIALS, ACTORS RESEMBLING THE REAL PARTICIPANTS, AND PROFESSIONAL JUDGES PRESIDING OVER SIMULATIONS HELD IN REAL COURTROOMS. ONE STUDY FOCUSED ON TWO POTENTIAL USES OF VIDEO TAPE IN THE COURTROOM: PRERECORDING ENTIRE TRIALS FOR PRESENTATION TO JURIES AND VIDEOTAPING DEPOSITIONS FOR USE IN OTHERWISE LIVE TRIALS. MARKED DIFFERENCES WERE NOT PRODUCED BY EITHER STUDY IN JUROR INFORMATION PROCESSING OR DECISIONMAKING. ANOTHER STUDY MEASURING INFORMATION RETENTION FROM LIVE AND TAPED SITUATIONS FOUND SLIGHTLY GREATER RECALL OF MATERIAL VIEWED ON TAPE. JUROR RESPONSE TO THE DELETION OF INADMISSIBLE MATERIAL FROM VIDEOTAPED TRIALS AND DEPOSITIONS WERE EXAMINED IN ADDITIONAL STUDIES. RESULTS INDICATED THAT NEITHER THE PRESENCE NOR ABSENCE OF SUCH MATERIAL EXERTED A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON EITHER GROUP OF JURORS. A STUDY TO DETERMINE WHETHER JURORS DISCUSS INADMISSIBLE MATERIAL DURING DELIBERATION FOUND SUCH DISCUSSIONS TO HAVE NO IMPACT ON THE JURY'S VERDICT. IN ADDITION, FOUR DIFFERENT EDITING METHODS WERE TESTED, FINDING THAT EDITS WHICH WERE MINIMALLY TIME-CONSUMING EXERTED THE LEAST DISRUPTIVE IMPACT ON JURORS. THE INFLUENCE OF MODE OF PRESENTATION AND TYPE OF CAMERA SHOT ON JURORS' ABILITY TO DETECT WITNESS DECEPTION ALSO PROVED INSIGNIFICANT. OVERALL FINDINGS FAIL TO INDICATE THAT USE OF VIDEOTAPED TRIAL MATERIALS PRODUCES DELETERIOUS EFFECTS ON JUROR RESPONSE. CHARTS, REFERENCES, AND ILLUSTRATIONS ARE INCLUDED. (MRK)