Impact of pretrial instruction on jurors' information processing and decision making

Abstract

Examined were the effects of pretrial instruction in the procedural law, requirements of proof, and substantive law on mock jurors' recall and interpretation of the evidence presented at trial, comprehension of the law, verdict choice, and verdict latency. Students and community members ( N = 125) were instructed before the evidence, after the evidence, both before and after the evidence, or not instructed at all. Two clear benefits of pretrial instruction emerged: Jurors instructed both before and after trial were better able to integrate facts and law, and preinstructed jurors more often deferred their verdict decisions until after the trial. Furthermore, preinstruction did not impair jurors' information processing or decision making in any way. These results suggest that important benefits of substantive preinstruction can be realized without apparent cost to jurors' performance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)