Examining the role of individual differences in mock jurors’ note taking during trials and recall of trial evidence



Lorek, J
(2019) Examining the role of individual differences in mock jurors’ note taking during trials and recall of trial evidence. PhD thesis, University of Liverpool.

[img] Text
200741686_May2019.pdf

Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

Although note taking has been consistently shown to improve jurors’ memory of trial evidence, no research has investigated the kind of individual differences that may either hinder or facilitate how much jurors are able to note down and recall. The principal aim of this thesis was to investigate the effects of individual differences on juror note taking during trials and recall of trial evidence. The first study, presented in Chapter 4, explored the associations between jurors’ handwriting speed, note taking during trials, and recall of trial information. The results showed that handwriting speed was positively associated with the amount of notes taken. Additionally, handwriting speed was positively associated with the amount of information recalled, with a mediation analysis showing this was through the amount of notes taken. Next, Chapter 5 focused on individual differences in short-term memory, working memory, and information processing ability. The results showed that short-term memory capacity was positively associated with the amount of notes jurors took. Further, short-term memory capacity was also associated with recall, with mediation analysis again showing this was via the amount of notes taken. However, neither working memory or information processing ability were significantly associated with the amount of information jurors noted down during the trial and subsequently recalled. Further, Chapter 6 studied individual differences in sustained and divided attention. Sustained attention, but not divided attention, was found to be positively associated with the amount of notes taken. Additionally, sustained attention was positively associated with the amount of trial information jurors recalled, and this was via the amount of notes taken. Next, Chapter 7 examined the impact of individual differences in prior trial experience on note taking and recall. Prior experience was found to enhance the amount of notes jurors take, however there were no differences in the amount of information recalled. In addition, the secondary aim of this thesis was to explore the association between the type of evidence jurors’ predominantly recall and the verdicts they reach. The first three studies (Chapters 4, 5, and 6) investigated this with a criminal trial. All studies found that jurors who recalled more incriminating evidence were more likely to reach a guilty verdict whereas those who recalled more non-incriminating evidence were more likely to reach a not guilty verdict. The final study (Chapter 7) in which a civil trial was used found that jurors who recalled more incriminating evidence were more likely to reach a legally culpable verdict. However, no significant association was found between the amount of incriminating evidence recalled by jurors and a not legally culpable verdict. The research findings presented in this thesis are the first to identify individual differences that influence how much jurors are able to note down during trials, and more importantly how much trial evidence they are able to recollect. It is crucial that jurors remember the important trial evidence given that the present studies showed that the type of evidence jurors predominantly recollect can predict their verdicts.

Item Type: Thesis (PhD)
Divisions: Fac of Health & Life Sciences > Institute of Psychology, Health and Society
Depositing User: Symplectic Admin
Date Deposited: 09 Sep 2019 10:32
Last Modified: 09 Jan 2021 03:13
DOI: 10.17638/03052990
Supervisors:
URI: https://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/id/eprint/3052990