The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The effects of pretrial publicity on juror verdicts: A meta-analytic review.
Abstract
The effect of pretrial publicity (PTP) on juror verdicts was examined through a meta-analysis of 44 empirical tests representing 5,755 subjects. In support of the hypothesis, subjects exposed to negative PTP were significantly more likely to judge the defendant guilty compared to subjects exposed to less or no negative PTP. Greater effect sizes were produced in studies which included a pretrial verdict assessment, use of the potential juror pool as subjects, multiple points of negative information included in the PTP, real PTP, crimes of murder, sexual abuse, or drugs, and greater length of time between PTP exposure and judgment. The effect was attenuated with student subjects, use of general rather than specific PTP information, certain types of PTP content, a post-trial predeliberation verdict, and specific types of crimes. Implications of these results are discussed, along with possible mechanisms that underlie the PTP effect.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Citations
Cites
The Handbook of Social Psychology
Gravatt, A. E., Lindzey, G. E., & Aronson, F. (1969) · The Family Coordinator · doi:10.2307/582242 · Cited by 12,518
Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory.
Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. M. (1973) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0020071 · Cited by 4,540
Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research.
Metcalfe, A., & Rosenthal, R. (1994) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series D (The Statistician) · doi:10.2307/2348600 · Cited by 4,249
Petty, R. E., Wegener, D. T., & Fabrigar, L. R. (1997) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.609 · Cited by 2,290
Explaining the evidence: Tests of the Story Model for juror decision making.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1992) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.189 · Cited by 761
Evidence evaluation in complex decision making.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.2.242 · Cited by 659
Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory structure on judgment.
Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1988) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.14.3.521 · Cited by 573
Hastie, R., Penrod, S., & Pennington, N. (1983) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 446
Decker, S. H. (1979) · Journal of Drug Issues · doi:10.1177/002204267900900315 · Cited by 409
A meta-analytic review of the weapon focus effect.
Steblay, N. M. (1992) · Law and Human Behavior · doi:10.1007/bf02352267 · Cited by 347
Self-citation
Cited by
Jury decision making: 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups.
Devine, D. J., Clayton, L. D., Dunford, B. B., Seying, R., & Pryce, J. (2001) · Psychology Public Policy and Law · doi:10.1037/1076-8971.7.3.622 · Cited by 553
Steblay, N. K., Dysart, J. E., Fulero, S. M., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2001) · Law and Human Behavior · doi:10.1023/a:1012888715007 · Cited by 328
“The goal of this work is to use the technique of meta-analysis (see Steblay, 1992; Steblay, Besirevic, Fulero, & Jimenez-Lorente, 1999 ) to examine the sequential-superiority effect and the variables that might moderate it, across the extant studies.”
MethodSelf-citationIssues in data monitoring and interim analysis of trials
Grant, A., Altman, D. G., Babiker, A. G., Campbell, M., Clemens, F., Darbyshire, J. H., Elbourne, D. R., McLeer, S., Parmar, M., Pocock, S., et al. (2005) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta9070 · Cited by 274
Mock juror sampling issues in jury simulation research: a meta-analysis.
Bornstein, B. H., Golding, J. M., Neuschatz, J., Kimbrough, C., Reed, K., Magyarics, C., & Luecht, K. (2017) · Law and Human Behavior · doi:10.1037/lhb0000223 · Cited by 227
Jury decision making: the state of the science
Devine, D. J. (2013) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.50-4115 · Cited by 213
Metadata
- Authors
- Steblay, N. M., Besirevic, J., Fulero, S. M., & Jimenez-Lorente, B.
- Affiliations
- Augsburg University (US)
- Sinclair Community College (US)
- Venue
- Law and Human Behavior
- Published
- 1999-04
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 219-235
- ISSN
- 0147-7307 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-661X
- OpenAlex
- W2132215549
- Semantic Scholar
- 57c2056cc32afeb35cc2478198012435aded1ab3
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 96.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Law and Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Jury Decision Making Processes
- Social Sciences › Law › Legal processes and jurisprudence
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Keywords
- pretrial publicity, jury decision-making, guilty verdicts, murder trial
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The effects of pretrial publicity on juror verdicts: A meta-analytic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1023/a:1022325019080
- The paper
- 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. https://doi.org/10.1023/a%3A1022325019080
