{"id":{"repo_id":"unlv","oai_identifier":"oai:oasis.library.unlv.edu:rtds-1006"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/unlv/oai:oasis.library.unlv.edu:rtds-1006","repository":{"repo_id":"unlv","name":"University of Nevada - Las Vegas","base_url":"https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/do/oai/"},"display":{"title":"Attorney advertising: The effect on juror perceptions and verdicts","abstract":"This study examined the effect of attorney television advertising on jurors. Southern Nevada jurors who had served on personal injury and malpractice trials were sent survey questionnaires designed to elicit juror attitudes about attorneys and attorney advertising. The response rate was 53.3%; The major finding was that although respondents generally do not like lawyer television advertising, it does not affect their trial verdicts unless jurors are actually confronted with a plaintiff's lawyer who advertises on television; then, jurors tend to vote for the defense. There is strong sentiment that the law should be changed to limit jury awards. Advertising lawyers become the focus of this perception and therefore jurors tend to vote against the plaintiff in these trials, voting their perceived economic self-interest. Jurors who have more positive opinions of lawyers in general and those in current working relationships with lawyers also have more positive opinions about legal service advertising.","abstract_html":"This study examined the effect of attorney television advertising on jurors. Southern Nevada jurors who had served on personal injury and malpractice trials were sent survey questionnaires designed to elicit juror attitudes about attorneys and attorney advertising. The response rate was 53.3%; The major finding was that although respondents generally do not like lawyer television advertising, it does not affect their trial verdicts unless jurors are actually confronted with a plaintiff's lawyer who advertises on television; then, jurors tend to vote for the defense. There is strong sentiment that the law should be changed to limit jury awards. Advertising lawyers become the focus of this perception and therefore jurors tend to vote against the plaintiff in these trials, voting their perceived economic self-interest. Jurors who have more positive opinions of lawyers in general and those in current working relationships with lawyers also have more positive opinions about legal service advertising.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Myers, Stephanie Moore"],"institution":"University of Nevada, Las Vegas","degree_name":"Master of Arts (MA)","degree_level":"Thesis","degree_discipline":"Communication Studies","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":1997,"date_issued":"1997-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"1997-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:23:59Z","subjects":[],"languages":["English"],"rights":["IN COPYRIGHT. For more information about this rights statement, please visit http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/7"],"render_values":[{"text":"https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/7","href":"https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/7","code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://doi.org/10.25669/hjp3-tkvs","outbound_label":"DOI","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Myers, Stephanie Moore"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["University of Nevada, Las Vegas"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Communication Studies"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts (MA)"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["English"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["IN COPYRIGHT. For more information about this rights statement, please visit http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["10.25669/hjp3-tkvs","https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/7","https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/context/rtds/article/1006/viewcontent/uc.pdf"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This study examined the effect of attorney television advertising on jurors. Southern Nevada jurors who had served on personal injury and malpractice trials were sent survey questionnaires designed to elicit juror attitudes about attorneys and attorney advertising. The response rate was 53.3%; The major finding was that although respondents generally do not like lawyer television advertising, it does not affect their trial verdicts unless jurors are actually confronted with a plaintiff's lawyer who advertises on television; then, jurors tend to vote for the defense. There is strong sentiment that the law should be changed to limit jury awards. Advertising lawyers become the focus of this perception and therefore jurors tend to vote against the plaintiff in these trials, voting their perceived economic self-interest. Jurors who have more positive opinions of lawyers in general and those in current working relationships with lawyers also have more positive opinions about legal service advertising."]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Attorney advertising: The effect on juror perceptions and verdicts"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:creator":["Myers, Stephanie Moore"],"dc:description.abstract":["This study examined the effect of attorney television advertising on jurors. Southern Nevada jurors who had served on personal injury and malpractice trials were sent survey questionnaires designed to elicit juror attitudes about attorneys and attorney advertising. The response rate was 53.3%; The major finding was that although respondents generally do not like lawyer television advertising, it does not affect their trial verdicts unless jurors are actually confronted with a plaintiff's lawyer who advertises on television; then, jurors tend to vote for the defense. There is strong sentiment that the law should be changed to limit jury awards. Advertising lawyers become the focus of this perception and therefore jurors tend to vote against the plaintiff in these trials, voting their perceived economic self-interest. Jurors who have more positive opinions of lawyers in general and those in current working relationships with lawyers also have more positive opinions about legal service advertising."],"dc:format":["pdf"],"dc:identifier":["10.25669/hjp3-tkvs","https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/rtds/7","https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/context/rtds/article/1006/viewcontent/uc.pdf"],"dc:language":["English"],"dc:publisher":["University of Nevada, Las Vegas"],"dc:rights":["IN COPYRIGHT. For more information about this rights statement, please visit http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:title":["Attorney advertising: The effect on juror perceptions and verdicts"],"dc:type":["Text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Communication Studies"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts (MA)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:23:59Z"}