1 00:00:02,040 --> 00:00:06,800 Speaker 1: Welcome to brain Stuff from How Stuff Works. Hi There, 2 00:00:06,840 --> 00:00:10,080 Speaker 1: brain Stuff, Lauren Vogel bomb here. Slow motion video can 3 00:00:10,119 --> 00:00:14,080 Speaker 1: make the boring seem exciting and the extraordinary even more incredible. 4 00:00:14,360 --> 00:00:17,040 Speaker 1: I'm thinking of everything from Wonder Woman's fight scenes to 5 00:00:17,120 --> 00:00:20,400 Speaker 1: epic t Time here. But it turns out that slowing 6 00:00:20,520 --> 00:00:23,080 Speaker 1: videos not only amps up the drama of a scene, 7 00:00:23,280 --> 00:00:26,960 Speaker 1: it also creates bias in viewers, specifically when it comes 8 00:00:26,960 --> 00:00:31,000 Speaker 1: to jury members. In court cases, video footage of crimes 9 00:00:31,040 --> 00:00:34,520 Speaker 1: often plays an important role in determining a perpetrator's punishment. 10 00:00:34,800 --> 00:00:37,680 Speaker 1: In some trials, jurors may watch slow motion video of 11 00:00:37,720 --> 00:00:41,240 Speaker 1: the criminal acting question, supposedly to better analyze the events 12 00:00:41,280 --> 00:00:44,239 Speaker 1: that took place, But a group of researchers, writing that 13 00:00:44,320 --> 00:00:47,000 Speaker 1: any benefit of video replay should be weighed against its 14 00:00:47,040 --> 00:00:50,800 Speaker 1: potentially biasing effects, conducted a study that suggests slow mo 15 00:00:51,000 --> 00:00:55,200 Speaker 1: video doesn't always help jurors make well informed decisions. Instead, 16 00:00:55,320 --> 00:00:57,520 Speaker 1: the elongated time of the video makes it seem like 17 00:00:57,560 --> 00:01:00,840 Speaker 1: the crime took longer to unfold, so jurors are more 18 00:01:00,880 --> 00:01:04,640 Speaker 1: likely to perceive the action as intentional. Whether a jury 19 00:01:04,640 --> 00:01:07,120 Speaker 1: thinks the crime was premeditated can be the difference between 20 00:01:07,120 --> 00:01:09,800 Speaker 1: the second and first degree murder charge, so it's literally 21 00:01:09,840 --> 00:01:12,440 Speaker 1: a matter of life and death. This was the case 22 00:01:12,480 --> 00:01:14,800 Speaker 1: in the two thousand nine murder trial of John Lewis, 23 00:01:15,000 --> 00:01:17,800 Speaker 1: which the researchers used as the basis for the study. 24 00:01:17,959 --> 00:01:20,800 Speaker 1: In the trial, the prosecution showed a slow motion video 25 00:01:20,800 --> 00:01:23,960 Speaker 1: of Lewis shooting a Philadelphia police officer, and the defense 26 00:01:24,040 --> 00:01:27,440 Speaker 1: argued that the stretched time made the act seem premeditated. 27 00:01:27,840 --> 00:01:30,560 Speaker 1: The prosecution rebutted by pointing out that the jurors also 28 00:01:30,600 --> 00:01:34,040 Speaker 1: saw the video at regular speed. To test whether sloma 29 00:01:34,160 --> 00:01:37,600 Speaker 1: video actually increases perception of time and intent, the researchers 30 00:01:37,600 --> 00:01:41,880 Speaker 1: conducted for studies. In the first, participants acting as jurors 31 00:01:42,080 --> 00:01:44,560 Speaker 1: saw either the video of Lewis slowed down or at 32 00:01:44,600 --> 00:01:48,560 Speaker 1: normal speed. In the second, the researchers tested perceived intention 33 00:01:48,840 --> 00:01:52,360 Speaker 1: in another scenario an NFL video of a prohibited helmet 34 00:01:52,360 --> 00:01:54,800 Speaker 1: to helmet tackle, as well as the effect of video 35 00:01:54,880 --> 00:01:57,840 Speaker 1: duration by pausing the video instead of slowing it at 36 00:01:57,880 --> 00:02:01,400 Speaker 1: crucial moments. In the third, they tested whether displaying and 37 00:02:01,600 --> 00:02:05,440 Speaker 1: mentioning the video's speed decreased bias, and in the fourth, 38 00:02:05,520 --> 00:02:08,280 Speaker 1: they had participants watched either the SlowMo version or the 39 00:02:08,320 --> 00:02:11,919 Speaker 1: regular video or both to test whether the group's perceptions 40 00:02:11,919 --> 00:02:16,120 Speaker 1: would be different. Confirming the researchers hypothesis, showing slowed down 41 00:02:16,240 --> 00:02:19,160 Speaker 1: video quadruple to the odds that participants would believe the 42 00:02:19,160 --> 00:02:23,360 Speaker 1: shooter guilty of intentional murder before deliberation, partially because of 43 00:02:23,360 --> 00:02:25,440 Speaker 1: the increased amount of time that the jurors felt the 44 00:02:25,480 --> 00:02:29,680 Speaker 1: dependant had to act. Also, viewers who watched the slow 45 00:02:29,760 --> 00:02:32,520 Speaker 1: motion tackle the second study were more likely to think 46 00:02:32,560 --> 00:02:35,520 Speaker 1: it was premeditated as well, and pausing the video didn't 47 00:02:35,560 --> 00:02:38,560 Speaker 1: change that. For the third study, even though viewers were 48 00:02:38,560 --> 00:02:41,120 Speaker 1: repeatedly reminded that it was a slow motion video, that 49 00:02:41,160 --> 00:02:43,440 Speaker 1: didn't change the results. They were the same as in 50 00:02:43,480 --> 00:02:46,360 Speaker 1: the first study, and the final studies showed that the 51 00:02:46,400 --> 00:02:49,359 Speaker 1: viewers who saw only the SloMo version of events were 52 00:02:49,400 --> 00:02:52,680 Speaker 1: three point four times more likely to convict than viewers 53 00:02:52,680 --> 00:02:55,920 Speaker 1: who only saw the regular version. Viewers who saw both 54 00:02:55,960 --> 00:02:58,679 Speaker 1: speeds were one point five times more likely to convict. 55 00:02:59,320 --> 00:03:02,880 Speaker 1: This demonstrates that showing both speeds lessons bias, but doesn't 56 00:03:02,919 --> 00:03:06,560 Speaker 1: completely eliminate it. The authors admit that the study doesn't 57 00:03:06,600 --> 00:03:09,360 Speaker 1: determine the effect of slowed video on the accuracy of 58 00:03:09,440 --> 00:03:12,639 Speaker 1: viewers judgment but considering the fact that the Supreme Court 59 00:03:12,680 --> 00:03:15,800 Speaker 1: of Pennsylvania ruled the slow MO in Lewis's case admissible 60 00:03:16,000 --> 00:03:18,480 Speaker 1: and that Lewis is now on death row despite his appeals, 61 00:03:18,760 --> 00:03:20,760 Speaker 1: the results of this study could change how we view 62 00:03:20,800 --> 00:03:24,440 Speaker 1: the role of videos in determining criminal sentences, and with 63 00:03:24,520 --> 00:03:28,520 Speaker 1: the explosion of police body cameras, surveillance cameras, and smartphone video, 64 00:03:28,800 --> 00:03:31,680 Speaker 1: the effective video replaced speed on jurors could have even 65 00:03:31,720 --> 00:03:40,160 Speaker 1: more importance in the coming years. Today's episode was written 66 00:03:40,160 --> 00:03:43,160 Speaker 1: by Eve's Jeffcote and produced by Tristan McNeil. For more 67 00:03:43,200 --> 00:03:45,480 Speaker 1: on this end lots of other criminal topics, visit our 68 00:03:45,520 --> 00:03:58,760 Speaker 1: home planet, how stuff Works dot com.