Effect of pretrial publicity via social media, mock juror sex, and rape myth acceptance on juror decisions in a mock sexual assault trial

References

• Rule 412, 28a U.S.C. art. IV
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Const. amend. VI.
   Google Scholar
• Acquaviva, B. L., O’Neal, E. N., & Clevenger, S. L. (2021). Sexual assault awareness in the #Metoo era: Student perceptions of victim believability and cases in the media. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 46(1), 6–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09585-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakhshay, S., & Haney, C. (2018). The media’s impact on the right to a fair trial: A content analysis of pretrial publicity in capital cases. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 24(3), 326–340. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000174
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnett, M. D., Sliger, K. B., & Wang, C. D. C. (2018). Religious affiliation, religiosity, gender, and rape myth acceptance: Feminist theory and rape culture. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 33(8), 1219–1235. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260516665110
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brickman, E., & Futterman, R. (2008). How juror internet use has changed the American jury trial. Journal of Court Innovation, 287. https://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/Brickman.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Brownmiller, S. (1975). Against our will: Men, women and rape. Simon & Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Burt, M. R. (1980). Cultural myths and support for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(2), 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.2.217
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chalmers, J., Leverick, F., & Munro, V. (2019). The provenance of what is proven: Exploring (mock) jury deliberation in Scottish rape trials. Scottish Government.
   Google Scholar
• Chapman, S. M. (1999). Section 276 of the criminal code and the admissibility of “sexual activity” evidence. Queen’s Law Journal, 25(1), 121–176.
   Google Scholar
• Cloud, J. (2011). Fascination with the Casey Anthony case has made it the first major murder trial of the social-media age. Time, 177(26), 42–45.
   Google Scholar
• Daftary-Kapur, T., Penrod, S. D., Oconnor, M., & Wallace, B. (2014). Examining pretrial publicity in a shadow jury paradigm: Issues of slant, quantity, persistence and generalizability. Law and Human Behavior, 38(5), 462–477. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000081
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies, M., Gilston, J., & Rogers, P. (2012). Examining the relationship between male rape myth acceptance, female rape myth acceptance, victim blame, homophobia, gender roles, and ambivalent sexism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27(14), 2807–2823. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260512438281
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devine, D. J. (2012). Jury decision making: The state of the science. New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dinos, S., Burrowes, N., Hammond, K., & Cunliffe, C. (2015). A systematic review of juries' assessment of rape victims: Do rape myths impact on juror decision-making? International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 43(1), 36–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlcj.2014.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards, K. M., Turchik, J. A., Dardis, C. M., Reynolds, N., & Gidycz, C. A. (2011). Rape myths: History, individual and institutional-level presence, and implications for change. Sex Roles, 65(11–12), 761–773. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9943-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellison, L., & Munro, V. E. (2009). Reacting to rape: Exploring mock jurors assessments of complainant credibility. British Journal of Criminology, 49(2), 202–219. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azn077.
   Google Scholar
• Ellison, L., & Munro, V. E. (2013). Better the devil you know? ‘Real rape’. Stereotypes and the relevance of a previous relationship in (mock) juror deliberations. The International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 17(4), 299–322. https://doi.org/10.1350/ijep.2013.17.4.433.
   Google Scholar
• Estrich, S. (1988). Real rape. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feigenson, N., & Park, J. (2006). Emotions and attributions of legal responsibility and blame: A research review. Law and Human Behavior, 30(2), 143–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-006-9026-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Felson, R. B., & Pare, P.-P. (2005). The reporting of domestic violence and sexual assault by nonstrangers to the police. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(3), 597–610. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00156.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishman, C. S. (1995). Consent, credibility, and the constitution: Evidence relating to a sex offense complainant’s past sexual behavior. Catholic University Law Review, 44, 709–820.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franiuk, R., Seefelt, J. L., Cepress, S. L., & Vandello, J. A. (2008). Prevalence and effects of rape myths in print journalism. Violence Against Women, 14(3), 287–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801207313971
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freedman, J. L., & Burke, T. M. (1996). The effect of pretrial publicity: The Bernardo case. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 38(3), 253–270. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjcrim.38.3.253
   Google Scholar
• Galvin, H. (1986). Shielding rape victims in the state and federal courts: A proposal for the second decade. Minnesota Law Review, 70, 763–916. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr/1433
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, J. M. (2006). Rape myth beliefs and prejudices instructions: Effects on decisions of guilt in a case of date rape. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 11(1), 75–80. https://doi.org/10.1348/135532505X68250
   Google Scholar
• Gray, J. M., & Horvath, M. A. H. (2018). Rape myths in the criminal justice system. In E. Milne, K. Brennan, N. South, & J. Turton (Eds.), Women and the criminal justice system: Failing victims and offenders? (pp. 15–41). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Grubb, A., & Turner, E. (2012). Attribution of blame in rape cases: A review of the impact of rape myth acceptance, gender role conformity and substance use on victim blaming. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17(5), 443–452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2012.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henry, A. P., Perillo, A. D., Reitz-Krueger, C. L., & Perillo, J. T. (2021). Reflecting the times? Reexamining the effect of alcohol intoxication on perceptions of campus sexual assault. Violence Against Women, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778012211005559.
   Google Scholar
• Hildebrand, M., & Najdowski, C. (2015). The potential impact of rape culture on juror decision-making. Albany Law Review, 78(3), 1059–1086.
   Google Scholar
• Jacquin, K. M., & Hodges, E. P. (2007). The influence of media messages on mock juror decisions in the Andrea Yates trial. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 25(4), 21–40.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, J. D. (1994). The effect of rape type and information admissibility on perceptions of rape victims. Sex Roles, 30(11–12), 781–792. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01544231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kosloski, A. E., Diamond-Welch, B. K., & Mann, O. (2018). The presence of rape myths in the virtual world: A qualitative textual analysis of the Steubenville sexual assault case. Violence and Gender, 5(3), 166–173. https://doi.org/10.1089/vio.2017.0067
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krahe, B., Temkin, J., Bieneck, S., & Berger, A. (2008). Prospective lawyers’ rape stereotypes and schematic decision making about rape cases. Psychology, Crime & Law, 14(5), 461–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160801932380
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leary, M. G. (2020). Is the #MeToo movement for real? The implications for jurors’ biases in sexual assault cases. Louisiana Law Review, 81, 82–118. https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2033&context=scholar
   Google Scholar
• Lennard, N. (2019, August 30). In secretive hearing, NYPD cops who raped Brooklyn teen get no jail time. https://theintercept.com/2019/08/30/nypd-anna-chambers-rape-probation/
   Google Scholar
• Lieberman, J. D., & Sales, B. D. (2006). Scientific jury selection. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/11498-000.
   Google Scholar
• Lynch, K. R., Wasarhaley, N. E., Golding, J. M., & Simcic, T. (2013). Who bought the drinks? Juror perceptions of intoxication in a rape trial. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28(16), 3205–3222. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260513496900
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maeder, E. M., Yamamoto, S., & Saliba, P. (2015). The influence of defendant race and victim physical attractiveness on juror decision-making in a sexual assault trial. Psychology, Crime & Law, 21(1), 62–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316x.2014.915325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMahon, S., & Farmer, G. (2011). An updated measure for assessing subtle rape myths. Social Work Research, 35(2), 71–81. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42659785. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/35.2.71
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman, D. A. (2014). Missing data: Five practical guidelines. Organizational Research Methods, 17(4), 372–411. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114548590
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parent, M. C. (2013). Handling item-level missing data: Simpler is just as good. The Counseling Psychologist, 41(4), 568–600. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000012445176
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peace, K. A., & Valois, R. L. (2014). Trials and tribulations: Psychopathic traits, emotion, and decision-making in an ambiguous case of sexual assault. Psychology, 5(10), 1239–1253. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2014.510136
   Google Scholar
• Pew Research Center. (2019). Americans are wary of the role social media sites play in delivering the news [Report]. https://www.journalism.org/2019/10/02/americans-are-wary-of-the-role-social-media-sites-play-in-delivering-the-news/
   Google Scholar
• Popping, R. (2015). Analyzing open-ended questions by means of text analysis procedures. Bulletin of Sociological Methodology, 128(1), 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0759106315597389
   Google Scholar
• Posetti, J. (2012, October 11). ‘Trial by social media’ in Australia prompts clash over accused murderer. http://mediashift.org/2012/10/trial-by-social-media-in-australia-prompts-clash-over-accused-murderer285/
   Google Scholar
• Rentschler, C. A. (2014). Rape culture and the feminist politics of social media. Girlhood Studies, 7(1), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.3167/ghs.2014.070106
   Google Scholar
• Ruva, C. L. (2010). How pretrial publicity affects juror decision making and memory. Nova Science.
   Google Scholar
• Ruva, C. L., & Coy, A. E. (2020). Your bias is rubbing off on me: The impact of pretrial publicity and jury type on guilt decisions, trial evidence interpretation, and impression formation. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 26(1), 22–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000220
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruva, C. L., Guenther, C. C., & Yarbrough, A. (2011). Positive and negative pretrial publicity: The roles of impression formation, emotion, and predecisional distortion. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38(5), 511–534. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854811400823
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruva, C. L., & LeVasseur, M. A. (2012). Behind closed doors: The effect of pretrial publicity on jury deliberations. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 18(5), 431–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2010.502120
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruva, C. L., & McEvoy, C. (2008). Negative and positive pretrial publicity affect juror memory and decision making. Journal Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14(3), 226–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898x.14.3.226
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruva, C. L., McEvoy, C., & Bryant, J. B. (2007). Effects of pretrial publicity and collaboration on juror bias and source memory errors. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21(1), 45–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1254
   Google Scholar
• Schuller, R., & Klippenstine, M. A. (2004). The impact of complainant sexual history evidence on jurors decisions: Considerations from a psychological perspective. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 10(3), 321–342. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.10.3.321
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuller, R. A., & Hastings, P. A. (2002). Complainant sexual history evidence: Its impact on mock jurors’ decisions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26(3), 252–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.00064
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuller, R. A., & Wall, A.-M. (1998). The effects of defendant and complainant intoxication on mock jurors’ judgments of sexual assault. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22(4), 555–573. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1998.tb00177.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schulze, C., & Koon-Magnin, S. (2017). Gender, sexual orientation, and rape myth acceptance: Preliminary findings from a sample of primarily LGBQ-identified survey respondents. Violence and Victims, 32(1), 159–180. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-15-00017
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schutte, J. W., & Hosch, H. M. (1997). Gender differences in sexual assault verdicts: A meta-analysis. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 12(3), 759–772.
   Google Scholar
• Soroka, S., Fournier, P., & Nir, L. (2019). Cross-national evidence of a negativity bias in psychophysiological reactions to news. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(38), 18888–18892. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1908369116
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Starkey, J. C., Koerber, A., Sternadori, M., & Pitchford, B. (2019). #MeToo goes global: Media framing of silence breakers in four national settings. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 43(4), 437–461. https://doi.org/10.1177/0196859919865254
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steblay, N. M., Besirevic, J., Fulero, S. M., & Jimenez-Lorente, B. (1999). The effects of pretrial publicity on juror verdicts: A meta-analytic review. Law and Human Behavior, 23(2), 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022325019080
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stichman, A. J., Wood, M., & Watson, A. (2019). Assessing student attitudes toward sexual assault by using a mock trial. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 30(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511253.2018.1448095
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stubbs-Richardson, M., Rader, N. E., & Cosby, A. G. (2018). Tweeting rape culture: Examining portrayals of victim blaming in discussions of sexual assault cases on twitter. Feminism & Psychology, 28(1), 90–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353517715874
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suarez, E., & Gadalla, T. M. (2010). Stop blaming the victim: A meta-analysis on rape myths. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(11), 2010–2035. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260509354503
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, J., & Tarrant, G. (2019). Trial by social media: How do you find the jury, guilty or not guilty? International Journal of Cyber Research and Education, 1(2), 50–61. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijcre.2019070105
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, N., & Joudo, J. (2005). The impact of pre-recorded video and closed-circuit television testimony by adult sexual assault complainants on jury decision-making: An experimental study. Australian Institute of Criminology Research & Public Policy, p. 68. https://www.aic.gov.au/publications/rpp/rpp68
   Google Scholar
• Tenzer, L. Y. (2019). Social media, venue, and the right to a fair trial. Baylor Law Review, 71(2), 420–463. https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/lawfaculty/1135/
   Google Scholar
• Ullman, S. E., & Townsend, S. M. (2007). Barriers to working with sexual assault survivors: A qualitative study of rape crisis center workers. Violence Against Women, 13(4), 412–443. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801207299191
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallach, S. J. (1997). Rape shield law: Protecting the victim at the expense of the defendant’s constitutional rights. New York Law School Journal of Human Rights, 13(2), 485–521. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/322560333.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Woody, W. D., & Viney, W. (2007). General pretrial publicity in sexual assault trials. Psychological Reports, 101(2), 527–530. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.101.2.527-530
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zaleski, K. L., Gundersen, K. K., Baes, J., Estupinian, E., & Vergara, A. (2016). Exploring rape culture in social media forums. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 922–927. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zidenberg, A. M., Wielinga, F., Sparks, B., Margeotes, K., & Harkins, L. (2021). Lost in translation: A quantitative and qualitative comparison of rape myth acceptance. Psychology, Crime & Law, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2021.1905810.
   Google Scholar