1. Clint Townson & Paul Brewer
Can I Get a Witness? Differences in Juror Perceptions and Behavior Across Source Types
Clint Townson & Paul Brewer
Michigan State University
University of Delaware

2. Perceived Trustworthiness
Theoretical Basis
Previous litigation research has thoroughly scrutinized one explicit type of witness, including eyewitnesses (see Wells & Olson, 2003), expert witnesses (see Vidmar, 2005), and police (see Slobogin, 1996)
Compare these three against each other utilizing the Elaboration Likelihood Model – specifically the peripheral route
Hypotheses reflect idealized versions of each type
Perceived Expertise
Perceived Trustworthiness
Jury Decision
Perceived
Source Type

3. Methodological Approach
Four-factor between subjects experimental design (N = 196)
Subjects shown a video of witness testimony; label and back-story of witness was manipulated
Subjects were then asked to identify the witness, evaluate his credibility, and make a verdict decision
Video was exactly the same across the four conditions: eyewitness, expert witness, police witness, and unidentified witness

4. Results – Credibility Assessments by Perceived Witness Type

5. Implications for Trial Consultants
Implication 1: The meticulous process of establishing a given witness’ identity serves a real purpose: induce credibility perceptions for juries
Implication 2: Experts are crucial witnesses because of their credibility: any expert’s knowledge and trustworthiness should be made salient in both civil and criminal cases
Implication 3: The further use of the ELM in trial research: how might this kind of processing change juror perceptions?