Dr. Andraka-Christou is Associate Professor, School of Global Health Management and Informatics, and Associate Professor, Department of Internal Medicine (Joint Secondary Appointment), University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL. Dr. Atkins is Associate Professor, Askew School of Public Administration, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL. Dr. Clark is Lecturer, Department of Learning Sciences & Educational Research, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL. Dr. del Pozo is Assistant Professor, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, and Assistant Professor, Rhode Island Hospital, Lifespan Corporation, Providence, RI. Dr. Ray is Senior Justice & Behavioral Health Sciences Researcher, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC.
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2024 Mar 11;52(1):15-22. doi: 10.29158/JAAPL.230075-23.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, problem-solving courts adopted virtual hearings. We conducted an online nationwide survey with a convenience sample of court staff to elicit their perceptions of court participants' attendance, engagement, willingness to talk, and ability to form connection with judges during in-person versus virtual hearings. Sign tests compared ordinal ratings for perceptions of court participant outcomes during in-person versus virtual hearing modalities, and for audiovisual technology versus audio-only technology. The final analysis included 146 staff. Staff felt that during in-person hearings judges could form closer relationships with participants, quality of information exchanged was higher, and participants were more willing to talk. Staff rated attendance as high regardless of the modality. Staff felt participant engagement was higher with audiovisual technology than audio-only technology. Our results suggest that staff have concerns about effects of virtual hearings on court participant engagement and ability to form relationships with judges. Courts should address these potential negative effects of virtual hearings. We are concerned that staff perceived participants more negatively when participants used audio-only versus audiovisual technology, because technology access could be associated with participant demographic characteristics. Further research is needed to examine court participant perceptions and outcomes.
在 COVID-19 大流行期间，解决问题的法院采用了虚拟听证。我们对法院工作人员进行了一项在线全国性调查，采用方便抽样的方式，了解他们对法院参与人在亲自听证和虚拟听证期间出庭、参与度、愿意交流以及与法官建立联系的能力的看法。符号检验比较了对亲自听证和虚拟听证模式下法院参与人结果的看法的顺序评分，以及对视听技术与仅音频技术的看法的顺序评分。最终分析包括 146 名工作人员。工作人员认为，在亲自听证中，法官可以与参与者建立更密切的关系，交换的信息质量更高，参与者更愿意交流。无论采用哪种模式，工作人员都认为出庭率很高。工作人员认为，与仅音频技术相比，视听技术可以提高参与者的参与度。我们的研究结果表明，工作人员对虚拟听证对法院参与人参与度和与法官建立关系的能力的影响表示担忧。法院应解决虚拟听证可能产生的这些负面影响。我们担心当参与者使用仅音频而非视听技术时，工作人员会对参与者产生更负面的看法，因为技术的获取可能与参与者的人口特征有关。需要进一步研究来检验法院参与人的看法和结果。
