By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm:
You have probably noticed that the experience of watching a movie in a theater is different from the experience of watching that same movie in your home. Even with the larger home-theater screen and sound system, there is still something about seeing a great film on a truly big screen: it holds attention better, it’s more involving, and it’s more memorable. By nature, the theater experience accentuates, meaning that a good movie can be better and a bad movie can be worse when it is projected on the big screen. The same dynamic applies to in-court presentation. Of course, IMAX isn’t coming soon to a courthouse near you, but based on new research in The Jury Expert (Heath & Grannemann, 2014), larger screen sizes in court do make a difference.
The research seems to be the first study of its kind focusing on the effect of screen and video size on mock jurors’ evaluations. The conclusion is that, “An increase in the video image size heightened the effects of evidence strength.” That means that, as with the movies, the good gets better and the bad gets worse. “An increase in video size resulted in strong evidence appearing stronger and weak evidence appearing weaker.” The results, along with two published responses from trial graphics and technology consultants, provide some practical considerations that go beyond the question of “Will they be able to see it?” This post takes a look at the study as well as its implications for your trial setup.
The Research: Screen Size Matters
Wendy Heath of Rider University and Bruce Grannemann of the UT Southwestern Medical Center conducted the study. It is one of several great pieces in November’s The Jury Expert, a great source not only for the fresh research it publishes, but also for its practice of including responses from practitioners. The researchers asked 263 participants to read a brief scenario, watch the testimony of a female criminal defendant, and then answer a questionnaire. In the process, they manipulated four variables:
-
- The size of video (either a large 9′ projection or a smaller 27″ video screen)
- The defendants emotion (either low or moderate)
- The relationship between the defendant and victim (either spouses or strangers)
- The strength of the evidence (either weak or strong evidence for conviction)
Combining these conditions, the study showed that in the large video condition, strong evidence seemed stronger and weak evidence seemed weaker. In strong evidence condition, those watching the large screen were 13% more likely to find the defendant guilty (65% versus 52%). Conversely, in the weak evidence condition, those watching the large screen were 19% less likely to find the defendant guilty (13% versus 32%). “Overall,” the authors concluded, “larger screens seemed to accentuate what was presented.” The other factors also played a role. For example, the defendant’s emotion also interacts with evidence strength: When the evidence is weak, than the defendant’s reaction matters more.
As far as the reason why the same testimony simply played on a larger screen would carry a different effect, the authors suggest that the larger screen creates a greater level of sensory arousal for the viewer. They also report on research (Reeves et al., 1999) indicating that screen size in a nontrial context leads to significantly greater attention. So mock jurors watching on a larger screen seem to be more likely to notice and remember the strengths or weaknesses in testimony.
The Practical Implications:
The study, as the authors acknowledge, is limited by its context: a criminal scenario with a female defendant. Still, the results are suggestive of the likely effect of screen size in other situations. Consultants, graphics specialists, as well as litigators, should focus not just on the visibility of the image, but on its overall effect based on mode of presentation.
Know When It Makes Sense to Go Big
Based on the effect of screen size in accentuating the strength or the weakness of evidence, it is a strategic question: Is this evidence that would help you if it received greater attention? The answer will be “Yes” on your stronger points and “No” on the weaker ones. Of course, you aren’t going to change-up the screen depending on the type of evidence you are showing at any given moment. But Dallas trial and graphics consultants Jason Barnes and Brian Patterson, in their response to the Heath and Grannemann article, share some situations in which the amount of space used on the screen can be legitimately manipulated depending on your purpose. For example, using a program like TrialDirector, witness testimony can be either be shown full screen, or quarter screen (along side one or more documents). If the testimony must be shown, but isn’t particularly helpful, you might want to use a smaller image size to shrink its effect.
Remember the Advantages of “One Big Screen”
My introduction above notwithstanding, the place where I’m most likely to see a movie these days is on an airplane, usually when coming home from work. I’m just old enough to remember the days when watching a movie on a plane meant everyone watching the same thing on one of those monitors suspended from the ceiling. Now, the movie is more likely to be a separate experience of watching a film on a screen built into a seat back, or fished out of a briefcase. That same trend of collective to individual experience has been replicated to some extent in our courts. This is particularly true in modernized federal courthouses, with individual monitors finding their way onto counsel’s lectern, the bench, the witness stand, and the jury box. Of course, unlike on a plane, everyone in court is all watching the same thing, but I still have never liked the fact that they’re all watching their own monitors. Ian McWilliams, a New England trial technologist, in his response to The Jury Expert article, prefers the “One Big Screen” set-up. It is a better option not just for the reason of easier set up that McWilliams gives. I believe it is better mainly because collective viewing feels like better communication than individual viewing: Everyone is looking in the same direction, and it is easier for the attorney or witness to stand and point things out on the screen.
This suggests an idea for future research building on the Heath and Grannemann study: Compare collective versus individual viewing experiences in a legal context to see if there are communication, comprehension, and persuasion advantages to the collective experience. I would suspect there are.
______
Other Posts on Using Visuals in Trial:
- Use PowerPoint (For Both Credibility and Comprehension)
- For Opening Statement (or Any Other Presentation), Keep Your Speaking Notes Off the Screen
- Ban the Bullet (From Your Slides)
- Follow the Ten Commandments of Graphics Use in Trial
______
Health W. P., & Grannemann, B. D. (2014). Does Video Image Size Affect Jurors’ Decisions? A Look at How Image Size Interacts with Evidence Strength, Defendant Emotion and the Defendant/Victim Relationship. The Jury Expert 26.4 (November). URL: http://www.thejuryexpert.com/2014/11/does-video-image-size-affect-jurors-decisions-a-look-at-how-image-size-interacts-with-evidence-strength-defendant-emotion-and-the-defendantvictim-relationship/
Photo Credit: Kenneth Lu, Flickr Creative Commons