Juries, Psychology Of

The Jury's Role and Functions

Lay participation in legal decision making serves multiple purposes. Because lay juries represent the community, the jury as an institution injects community views into the law, so that legal outcomes are more consistent with prevailing values. Supporters of the jury say that it increases the soundness of legal decision making because multiple members of the community, usually six or twelve, decide the case rather than a single judge. Therefore, jury decisions may have greater legitimacy than judicial decisions. Jury service is also an opportunity to educate the public about the legal system.

Although several positive features have been associated with the jury, its use has declined over time and it has become controversial. Some argue that although the jury was once an appropriate legal decision maker, it is no longer competent to decide today's complex disputes. Others charge that biases and prejudices infect jury decisions. Criticisms about jury incompetence and prejudice have been used to support efforts to restrict or eliminate trial by jury and replace it with trial by judge.

History of Psychological Research on the Jury

Beginning in the 1970s, psychologists became interested in studying the jury system. For some psychologists, the jury was an attractive vehicle for examining cognitive or social-psychological theories. Intrigued by societal debates over the soundness of trial by jury, other scholars were interested in using psychological research methods and theories to explore how the jury operated in practice. Both basic and applied research on the jury flourished. Cognitive psychologists examined how individuals asked to assume the role of a juror evaluated and combined evidence to arrive at verdicts. Psychologists interested in personality explored whether and how individual differences influenced [Page 863]decision making. Social psychologists studied the group processes of deliberating juries. Lawyers have used psychological research on these and other topics to inform jury selection, attorney evidence presentation, and judicial instructions. Psychologists have also tested the impact of proposed jury reforms, such as those on jury size, decision rule, and trial innovations.

Although much psychological research on juries has taken place in the United States, there also have been important programs of jury research in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

In the field of jury research, scholars discuss the value of different research approaches, particularly jury simulations in which participants are asked to take on the role of jurors. Although jury simulation experiments offer the possibility of good scientific control, some have questioned their relevance to actual jury decision making. Some early research programs used college students as subjects and employed brief, unrealistic, and legally inaccurate summaries of trials. Responding to criticisms of this approach, several investigators have improved the quality of their jury simulation studies and sought converging evidence from other methodological approaches, such as interviewing actual jurors and studying jury verdict patterns.

...