Function of text structure in jurors' comprehension and decision making.
The Story Model of Juror Decision Making proposes that jurors develop a story of the case, match the story to verdict templates, and then select the best match between the story and the verdict. The present research investigated the effect different text structures in opening statements and closing arguments had on jurors' recognition for trial information and decision-making. It was hypothesized: (1) narrative opening statements would enhance story construction and (2) comparison-expository closing arguments would enhance story classification. 80 introductory psychology students read a medical malpractice mock lawsuit, rendered a verdict, were tested for recognition of trial facts, and gave an estimate of the surgeon's negligence. The defense's opening statements and closing arguments were written either in narrative or comparison-expository text format. Although weak support for the first hypothesis was found, evidence supporting the effect of comparison-expository text in closing arguments on juror decisions was stronger.