Cross-cultural communication in the courtroom

In international courtrooms, where legal professionals and witnesses often come from vastly different cultural backgrounds, communication can be a challenge. As part of the ERC project on Eyewitness Memory in Cross-Cultural Contexts, a new case study by Dylan Drenk, Maria Shenouda, Barbora Hola and Annelies Vredeveldt sheds light on how these cultural dynamics play out in practice.

The researchers analyzed over 13,000 pages of courtroom transcripts from the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, focusing on how legal professionals from WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic) and non-WEIRD countries questioned witnesses, and how those witnesses responded. They found that cultural differences were more evident in the responses of witnesses than in the questions posed by attorneys.

For example, witnesses from non-WEIRD backgrounds were more likely to give indirect answers – often shaped by cultural norms that discourage confrontation or emphasize group harmony. These indirect responses can be misinterpreted by legal professionals as evasive or unclear. In contrast, witnesses from WEIRD backgrounds tended to give more direct answers.

The study also found that defense attorneys used more closed questions that prompt short, specific answers, while prosecutors favored open-ended questions that allow for more elaborate responses. Interestingly, attorneys from non-WEIRD countries used closed questions more frequently than their WEIRD counterparts.

These findings highlight the importance of cultural sensitivity in international legal proceedings. Misunderstandings rooted in cultural differences can affect how testimony is perceived and, ultimately, how justice is served. The authors call for better training for legal professionals and interpreters to help bridge cultural divides in the courtroom.

The article is published open-access in Journal of Criminal Psychology and can be read here.