skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

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: 238091 Find in a Library
Title: Knowing When the Camera Lies: Judicial Instructions Mitigate the Camera Perspective Bias
Journal: Legal and Criminological Psychology  Volume:17  Issue:1  Dated:February 2012  Pages:123-135
Author(s): Jennifer K. Elek; Lezlee J. Ware; Jennifer J. Ratcliff
Date Published: February 2012
Page Count: 13
Publisher: http://www.wiley.com 
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United Kingdom
Annotation: This study examined the effectiveness of judicial instructions in mitigating bias in individual juror verdicts due to the presentation of videotaped confessions introduced at trial in which the camera focused primarily on the suspect.
Abstract: This study stemmed from previous research that found videotaped confession evidence elicits a harsher juror evaluation of a defendant when the camera recording the confession focused on the suspect. The findings of the current study confirmed its initial hypothesis, i.e., that mock jurors who received judicial instructions to correct for this bias of camera perspective would make more lenient judgments about the confessor’s guilt than those who viewed a videotaped confession unattended by such judicial instructions. The judicial instructions were patterned after the “flexible correction model” (FCM). As one of the most prolific models of bias correction, jurors must be made aware that a bias exists and understand the direction and magnitude of the effect in order to adequately correct for its impact (Wegener & Patty, 1995, 1997). In the current study, those assigned to the judicial-instruction condition read the information about coercion as well as the FCM-based instructions about the bias associated with the camera perspective. Those in the non-instructional condition were not made aware of the bias inherent in a typical confession videotaped with a focus on the suspect. The finding of the impact of the judicial instructions, however, is tempered by the finding that the group receiving judicial instructions voted “not guilty” only when the staged videotaped confessions were false; for the two true confessions, the judicial instructions did not cause the jurors to waiver from their conviction that the confession was true. This suggests that judicial instructions only counter a bias that tends to ignore evidence of a false confession. 1 figure, 43 references, and appended verbatim judicial instructions
Main Term(s): Court procedures
Index Term(s): Confessions; Jury decisionmaking; Jury instructions; Video taped testimony; Videotapes
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=260134

*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.