| 1 |
Experiment 2: Jury Suggestibility: The Effect of Judicial Instruction on Juror’s use of Covert Recording Transcripts ...
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
Covert recordings refer to legally obtained audio recordings containing unmonitored conversations which have been secretly recorded through hidden devices, and without the awareness of one or more speakers (Fraser, 2014; Fraser, 2017). Considering the commonly unsatisfactory quality of such recordings, a written forensic transcript is normally presented to assist juror understanding in contemporary Australian courts (Fraser, 2018; Lange et al., 2011). Due to potential errors and cognitive biases transcribers may encounter during transcription, there is a risk that the provided transcripts contain inaccuracies and become misleading to jurors (Fraser, 2018; Miller, 2016). Research (e.g., Lange et al, 2011) has demonstrated that providing a written transcript alongside indistinct covert recordings may have a detrimental effect on mock juries’ decision-making processes, leading to more inaccurate and incriminating judgments. Moreover, judges’ instructions about using such transcripts only as an aid may be futile ...
|
|
Keyword:
Applied Linguistics; Evidence; forensic psychology; FOS Languages and literature; FOS Law; FOS Psychology; Law; Law and Psychology; Linguistics; Other Psychology; Psychology; Social and Behavioral Sciences
|
|
URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/54dzr
https://osf.io/54dzr/
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
|
|
