Abstract
The rapid escalation of cybercrime prosecutions has made digital forensic evidence a cornerstone of contemporary criminal trials, yet lay jurors often struggle to comprehend complex cryptographic, network log, and metadata analyses. This experimental study examined the interactive effects of expert witness presentation style and technical complexity on mock juror comprehension, perceptions of expert credibility, and verdict inclinations. Using a 2 (Presentation Style: Narrative-Pedagogical vs. Technical-Formal) × 2 (Technical Complexity: Moderate vs. High) between-subjects factorial design, 384 jury-eligible participants evaluated a simulated corporate network intrusion trial featuring expert forensic testimony. Results revealed that a narrative-pedagogical presentation style significantly enhanced objective comprehension and perceived expert trustworthiness, particularly under conditions of high technical complexity. Conversely, technical-formal delivery of highly complex evidence induced cognitive overload, prompting heuristic evaluation strategies wherein jurors relied disproportionately on perceived confidence rather than evidential substance. Mediation analysis demonstrated that objective comprehension and source credibility jointly mediated the relationship between presentation style and conviction certainty. These findings highlight the critical psychological mechanisms governing juror evaluations of digital evidence and provide empirical recommendations for forensic practitioners and legal counsel presenting digital forensic data in the courtroom.
