Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Quality of information exchanged.
- Figure 2.
Judges’ ability to form connections with participants.
- Figure 3.
Participants’ willingness to talk.
- Figure 4.
Participant attendance.
- Figure 5.
Participant engagement level, audio and video versus audio-only.
Tables
Characteristics Percent Female 63.6% White 67.6% Modality Half in-person; half virtual 18.3% Usually virtual 42.2% Virtual only 39.4% Role Court administrator 69.7% Judge 30.3% Court Type Adult drug court 45.8% DUI court 13.4% Family dependency drug court 8.5% Mental health court 14.7% Veterans court 16.2% Co-occurring court 2.1% Rural 29.6% DUI = driving under the influence.
Variable In-Person Better, n Virtual Better, n No Difference, n Total, N P Quality of information exchanged during hearing 60 3 79 142 < .001 Judge’s ability to form connections with participants 80 2 57 139 < .001 Participants’ willingness to talk during status hearings 44 20 75 139 < .05 Attendance 27 14 98 139 < .1 Variable Audio and Video Better, n Audio Only Better, n No Difference, n Total, N P Quality of engagement with audio and video versus audio only 56 7 63 126 < .001
