Cognitive aspects of legal case representation with narratives and graphics

This investigation was designed to explore the effects of verbal narratives (chronological vs. conceptual), graphics (conceptual vs. chronological vs. none) and their interaction on information processing – comprehension, perspective, and judgment—of jury members in a litigation law setting with regard to a complex legal case. Two hundred and two undergraduate participants from a midsized western university took part in this study—147 females and 49 males with a mean age 22.56 (SD=5.80). Participants were learned about a legal case based on clues for case comprehension provided by the narratives and graphics in six experimental condition, where information was structurally organized either around concepts (conceptual type) or events (chronological type), with or without a visualization. Measurements of information processing consisted of three questionnaires—one measuring general case understanding, including short-answer essays, the second measuring perceptions and attitudes towards the case, and the third collecting information about demographics. Results revealed no significant influence on pairing narratives and graphics together, relative to conceptual or chronological structure, on comprehension of a case across all conditions. Yet, findings indicated significant variations in the type of opinions and elaborations participants used across their essays to express understanding of the legal case they were presented, as well as in judgments of guilt and blame. For example, participants remembered significantly more from the narrative as paraphrases and were most expressive in their opinions, without having a particular perspective. Results also failed to indicate any significant differential influence of the narrative type and graphic type on participants’ assignment of guilt and blame toward the plaintiff and defendant. Participants assigned significantly more blame to the Defendant than to the Plaintiff. And yet, the less participants understood the case, the more likely they were to find the Plaintiff guilty.