Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 11, 2026

A Novel Approach for the Administration of Medications and Fluids in Emergency Scenarios and Settings
Published on: November 9, 2016
Medication state at the time of the offense: Medication noncompliance, insight and criminal responsibility
Caroline Titcomb Parrott1, Michelle A Jones2, Stanley L Brodsky3
1Taylor Hardin Secure Medical Facility, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA.
Abstract:
This study used a mixed quantitative-qualitative methodology to examine whether mock jurors considered a defendant's meta-responsibility - specifically, the defendant's medication noncompliance and degree of insight into his/her schizophrenia - when determining the person's criminal responsibility. The degree of expert witness explanation regarding these factors was also varied. Participants (n = 173) were grouped into 30 juries, randomized across five conditions, and shown mock testimony and attorney arguments based on a real not guilty by reason of insanity court case. Linear mixed-modeling analysis showed that manipulations of medication compliance, insight, and expert testimony elaboration did not predict differential verdict and meta-responsibility outcomes. Nevertheless, qualitative exploration of focus groups from five juries (n = 29) indicated that participants across groups strongly considered meta-responsibility, but did so in a way that, along with a host of other considerations, suggested mock jurors were unable and/or unwilling to follow their duties as the triers of fact. Implications for legal participants, expert witnesses, and researchers are discussed.
Insights
Mock jurors considered defendants' meta-responsibility, including medication compliance and insight into schizophrenia, but this did not influence verdicts. Jurors struggled to adhere to legal duties when assessing criminal responsibility.
Area of Science:
- Forensic Psychology
- Legal Psychology
Background:
- Assessing criminal responsibility in defendants with schizophrenia is complex.
- Mock jurors' consideration of defendant meta-responsibility (medication compliance, insight) is not well understood.
Purpose of the Study:
- To examine mock juror consideration of defendant meta-responsibility in schizophrenia cases.
- To determine if medication compliance and insight influence verdicts and assessments of criminal responsibility.
Main Methods:
- Mixed-methods study with 173 participants in 30 mock juries.
- Randomized controlled trial varying expert testimony on medication compliance and insight.
- Quantitative analysis (linear mixed-modeling) and qualitative focus groups.
Main Results:
- Manipulations of compliance, insight, and expert testimony did not predict verdict or meta-responsibility outcomes.
- Qualitative data revealed jurors strongly considered meta-responsibility.
- Jurors appeared unable or unwilling to fulfill their duties as triers of fact.
Conclusions:
- Mock jurors' consideration of meta-responsibility did not align with legal requirements.
- Challenges exist in mock juror decision-making processes regarding defendants with schizophrenia.
- Findings have implications for legal professionals, expert witnesses, and future research.
Related Concept Videos
Inhaled Medications
Endocarditis III: Medical Management
Myocarditis III: Medical Management
Pericarditis III: Medical Management
Heart Failure V: Medical Management
Mitral Stenosis III: Medical Management

