On February 25, 2020, Yael Granot presented her research on perception versus reality in video evidence in the courtroom. She explained the the fact that while visual evidence is highly persuasive and is given ample weight in the courtroom, the jurors viewing the evidence are not actually processing everything recorded in the video, which can lead to a conviction of guilt when unwarranted. Limitations of visual acuity lie in the fact in order for the brain to process visual information, it needs to prioritize visual stimuli and select for the information that it finds the most important, while blurring out the rest. Since approximately 50% of the cortex is devoted to processing visual input, video evidence is more cognitively and emotionally arousing and vivid than other forms of evidence, giving the jurors the impression that they are perceiving the information accurately, when in fact the information selected is guided by bias, perhaps the most prevalent and debilitating of which lies in in group and out group identification.
Granot referred to previously conducted research in which it was confirmed that black defendants are convicted more often, and with 19% longer sentences than white defendants in regards to the same crimes. She conducted research in which mock jurors were screened on their group identification and then instructed to look at visual evidence of an altercation between a police officer and a civilian in which culpability was ambiguous. It was concluded that jurors who identified with the police officer were more likely to endorse punishment of the civilian, while those who identified with the civilian were more likely to find the officer culpable, and endorsed punishment of the officer. The visual stimulus presented to the mock jurors was the same and ambiguous, so the correlation between group identification and conviction decision suggests that the visual attention of jurors is guided by their group identification, which subsequently influences punishment decisions.
After hearing Granot speak, I was curious to research if other aspects of the visual field elicit biased verdicts from juries. A little digging led me to a research article by Jessica M. Salerno et al titled “Seeing Red: Disgust Reactions to Gruesome Photographs in Color (But not in Black and White) Increase convictions”, in which Salerno and colleagues outline their research on comparison between black and white vs colored photos evidence. Their research shows that color photographs, particularly in the case of gruesome evidence, elicit an emotional feeling of disgust, and make the jurors more conviction prone. Black and white photographs do not elicit an emotional response as intense as color photographs, while still maintaining the objective information, and which reduce the jurors likelihood to convict. Their research also suggests that after viewing photograph evidence, jurors are less likely to be swayed by the defense evidence, which given the complexities of visual attention, is quite worrisome.
While Granot’s work was centered around video evidence, while Salerno focused on photographs, I would be curious to know whether the effects of group identification are amplified or minimized in photo versus video evidence. I would also be curious to see how color vs black and white evidence effects the emotional response in visual footage, and if color amplifies group bias in video evidence. Additionally, Salerno's work analyzed specifically gruesome images and feelings of disgust. Perhaps group identification in colored footage that isn't necessarily gruesome could elicit empathy to in-group individuals as well, but that is yet to be discovered. If research was run on this, it could provide direction to courts to either show photos in slideshow or video form if possible, to convert the video evidence into individual photos for the jurors to look through, and to determine whether to convert colored evidence into black and white for the sake of maintaining objectivity and eliminating juror bias.
Granot, Y., Balcetis, E., Feigenson, N., & Tyler, T. (2018). In the eyes of the law: Perception versus reality in appraisals of video evidence. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 24(1), 93–104. doi: 10.1037/law0000137
Salerno, J. M. (2017). Seeing red: Disgust reactions to gruesome photographs in color (but not in black and white) increase convictions. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 23(3), 336–350. doi: 10.1037/law0000122
No comments:
Post a Comment