Campus Access Only
All rights reserved. This publication is intended for use solely by faculty, students, and staff of University of the Pacific. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, now known or later developed, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author or the publisher.
Date of Award
Thesis - Pacific Access Restricted
Master of Arts (M.A.)
Gary N. Howells
First Committee Member
Kenneth L. Beauchamp
Second Committee Member
Roger C. Katz
It is becoming commonplace for video technology of various forms to be utilized in modern courtrooms. However, little research exists on how the use of videos in the courtroom influences jury decision making. Studies on this topic could lead to greater understanding of the mechanisms by which jurors arrive at their decisions. For example, jurors are instructed not to let emotional factors impact their decisions, yet attorneys often appeal to a juror's conscience rather than his or her intellect in trying to win a case.
In order to examine these issues, the present study attempted to answer two main questions. First, does video footage influence jurors more than traditional oral testimony? Second, if video evidence does have a strong impact on juror decisions, what are the mechanisms by which this occurs? Participants examined actual materials from a civil case presented in one of three formats: print (transcripts), traditional oral testimony, or traditional testimony plus audiovisual recreation. They were given the Profile of Mood States (POMS) as a pre-and post-test measure of emotional state. Furthermore, they were tested on retention of factual material and asked to designate damage awards as well as responsibility levels of both the plaintiff and defendant in the case. Results indicated that a number of changes in mood state occurred following stimulus presentation, regardless of the stimulus presentation mode or gender of the subject. The five POMS scales on which this pattern appeared were the Depression-Dejection scale, the Fatigue-Inertia scale, the Anger-Hostility scale, the Vigor-Activity scale, and the Total Mood Disturbance scale.
Fishfader, Vicki Lynn. (1994). Evidential and extralegal factors in jury verdicts: Presentation mode, retention, and level of emotionality. University of the Pacific, Thesis - Pacific Access Restricted. https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/uop_etds/2774
To access this thesis/dissertation you must have a valid pacific.edu email address and log-in to Scholarly Commons.Find in PacificSearch Find in ProQuest
If you are the author and would like to grant permission to make your work openly accessible, please email