Quality-checking the new normal: trial modality in online jury decision-making research

Area of Science:

• Legal Psychology
• Jury Research Methodology
• Online Research Validity

Background:

• The modality of trial presentation (video vs. written transcript) can influence jury research outcomes.
• Understanding these differences is crucial for internal and ecological validity in legal studies.
• Online research platforms present unique challenges for data quality and participant engagement.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare videotaped versus written trial materials on jury verdicts, party perceptions, and emotional responses.
• To assess the impact of modality on data quality checks in online research.
• To investigate the perceived salience of racial issues across different presentation formats.

Main Methods:

• 139 participants recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk were randomly assigned to view a videotaped trial or read a written transcript.
• Participants completed questionnaires on verdicts, party perceptions, racial salience, and emotional states.
• Quality checks were administered to assess participant attention and comprehension of trial content.

Main Results:

• No significant differences were found in verdicts or perceived racial salience between video and transcript conditions.
• Participants viewing transcripts performed significantly better on quality checks than those watching videos.
• Transcript viewers reported more positive perceptions of the pathologist and police officer; video viewers showed more negative emotion for White defendants.

Conclusions:

• While verdicts were unaffected, modality impacts trial party perceptions and emotional responses, highlighting a trade-off in jury research.
• Written transcripts appear more effective for ensuring data validity in online jury research.
• Researchers must implement robust quality checks, especially for online studies, to ensure participant attention to trial materials.