Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
Does Avoiding Judicial Isolation Outweigh the Risks Related to “Professional Death by Facebook”?
Previous Article in Journal / Special Issue
Cyberbullying at Work: In Search of Effective Guidance
Article

Students vs. Jurors: Responding to Enhanced Video Technology

1
Department of Law, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, UK
2
Justice Research Group, University of Western Sydney, Locked Bag 1979, Penrith, NSW 2751, Australia
3
School of Psychology and Australian Graduate School of Policing and Security, Charles Sturt University, PO Box 168, Manly, NSW 1655, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Laws 2014, 3(3), 618-635; https://doi.org/10.3390/laws3030618
Received: 30 April 2014 / Revised: 16 August 2014 / Accepted: 28 August 2014 / Published: 9 September 2014
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Technology, Social Media and Law)
This study investigated the influence of visual media technologies used in remote witness testimony, examining whether it is suitable to use students as mock jurors when measuring the impact of new technologies. A 2 × 2 mixed factorial design explored how student status impacted ratings of the quality of the technology and remote witness facilities. A sample of 79 students and non-empanelled jurors from the Victorian Metropolitan County Court viewed direct questioning of four lay witnesses who testified from a remote location via standard or enhanced video technology. Students differed significantly from jurors in their attitudes towards media and technology. In responding to technology enhancements, students were similar in rating changes in the quality of the technology, but differed significantly in how they rated changes to the design of remote witness facilities. Students were thus a suitable sample to measure the effect of technological change in court on perceptions of technology, but not on perceptions of design. We conclude by stressing such technology enhancements can improve the quality of experience for all jurors. View Full-Text
Keywords: mock-juries; remote testimonies; court technology; witness evidence mock-juries; remote testimonies; court technology; witness evidence
MDPI and ACS Style

Rossner, M.; Tait, D.; Goodman-Delahunty, J. Students vs. Jurors: Responding to Enhanced Video Technology. Laws 2014, 3, 618-635. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws3030618

AMA Style

Rossner M, Tait D, Goodman-Delahunty J. Students vs. Jurors: Responding to Enhanced Video Technology. Laws. 2014; 3(3):618-635. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws3030618

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rossner, Meredith, David Tait, and Jane Goodman-Delahunty. 2014. "Students vs. Jurors: Responding to Enhanced Video Technology" Laws 3, no. 3: 618-635. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws3030618

Find Other Styles

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Only visits after 24 November 2015 are recorded.
Back to TopTop