Abstract
The present study examines the ‘fact based’ approach to jury instructions, which embeds legal concepts in a series of logically ordered written factual questions that the jury must answer to reach a verdict. The study utilised a sample of 1007 adults called for jury service in Victoria, Australia. Four instructional types (standard, plain language, checklist, fact based) were compared on paraphrase and application measures across three time points. Results indicated that paraphrase performance was significantly lower for standard instructions compared to all other instructional types at the pre-deliberation stage. Findings around application of law were mixed. At the pre-deliberation stage, participants receiving fact based instructions had significantly higher scores on true/false application questions compared with participants in other conditions, whereas there were no significant differences between conditions for multiple-choice application. However, testing following deliberation revealed that participants in the fact-based condition had significantly higher scores on multiple-choice application items.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
