Huckstepp, Andrew2020-11-082020-11-082019http://hdl.handle.net/2440/128846This item is only available electronically.Pretrial publicity (PTP) of an upcoming court case through traditional media sources of print, television and radio have been demonstrated to bias juror decision-making and threaten fundamental judicial rights of impartiality and independence for defendants. Despite the now ubiquitous nature of digital media, little-to-no research has been conducted on the biasing effects of social media (Facebook™, Twitter™, YouTube™ etc.) PTP on juror decision making. Employing a 2*2 (and control group) experimental design, 131 participants read a mock-trial transcript and provided ratings of defendant culpability and confidence in verdict, with some participants exposed to PTP in the form of a Facebook post (pro-defendant or pro-defence slanted) and some exposed to a mock-judge’s admonishment against relying on extralegal social media PTP when reaching a verdict. Planned comparisons revealed no difference between the control, pro-prosecution PTP (instruction and no instruction) and pro-defence (instruction and no instruction) groups for guilt ratings and verdicts. Exploratory analysis revealed the presence of a potential overcorrection effect whereby pro-prosecution groups provided lessened guilt ratings compared to the pro-defence and control groups. Participant confidence in the legal system was not found to moderate PTP’s effects on guilt ratings. Implications of these findings for the psycho-legal context are discussed.Honours; PsychologyThesis