Juror's Perceptions

While the previous study analyzed the effects of verbal communication on witness testimony, other studies have been conducted analyzing the effects of nonverbal communication. Notably, one study analyzed the effects of judge’s nonverbal communication on juror’s perceptions (Badzinski & Pettus, 1994). The researchers asked three questions. The first question was, “Does judges’ nonverbal involvement influence individual and/or group verdicts” (p. 311). The next two questions regarded the effects of sex on trial outcomes; however, these resulted in inconclusive findings. Therefore, the primary focus will be on the first question.
In order to answer their question, the researchers gathered 412 students to participate in their study (Badzinski & Pettus, 1994). These students were then assigned to one of eight experimental conditions in which they were asked to watch a trail tape and reach a verdict on the defendant. The eight groups
M., & Pettus, A. B. (1994). Nonverbal involvement and sex: Effects on jury decision making. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 22(4), 309-321.
Boccaccini, M. T. (2002). What do we really know about witness preparation? Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 20, 161-189. doi: 10.1002/bsl.472
Burnett, A., & Badzinski, D. M. (2005). Judge nonverbal communication on trial: Do mock trial jurors notice?. Journal of Communication, 55(2), 209-224.
Cramer, R. J., DeCoster, J., Neal, T. S., & Brodsky, S. L. (2013). The observed witness efficacy scale: A measure of effective testimony skills. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(8), 1696-1703. doi:10.1111/jasp.12124
London, H., Meldman, P. J., & Lanckton, A. C. (1970). The jury method: How the persuader persuades. Public Opinion Quarterly, 34(2), 171-183.
Vidmar, N., & Laird, N. M. (1983). Adversary social roles: Their effects on witnesses' communication of evidence and the assessments of adjudicators. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(5),