Voir Dire and Jury SelectionI am grateful for the contributions of Jason Dickinson and Brian Cutler to an earlier version of this chapter. Portions of the research presented in this chapter were made possible by support from the National Science Foundation (SES# 0136652, SES# 0520617, and SES# 0921408).
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 23637301 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Margaret Bull Kovera (0000-0002-2551-8434, City University of New York, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2012 |
| Publication date | 2012-09-26 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | OTHER |
| Venue | Handbook of Psychology, Second Edition (JOURNAL) |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1002/9781118133880.hop211026 |
| OpenAlex | W2913416102 |
| ISBN | 9781118133880 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 101 |
Jury selection is intended to ensure that citizens who serve as jurors can fairly consider the evidence in a case and apply the law as the judge gives it to them. Jury selection occurs during a legal proceeding known as voir dire, in which the judge and/or the attorneys question prospective jurors to determine their suitability for jury service. Judges may excuse prospective jurors for cause if they exhibit bias during voir dire and report either an unwillingness or inability to set aside the bias. With peremptory challenges, attorneys may remove a limited number of potential jurors without providing a justification. The law and empirical research related to jury selection are reviewed. Topics covered include: extended versus minimal voir dire, juror rehabilitation during voir dire, and prohibitions against using peremptory challenges to remove members of certain demographic groups. The relative effectiveness of traditional attorney-conducted jury selection (i.e., the use of implicit theories about juror behavior based on litigation experience) and scientific jury selection (i.e., the use of social science methods to identify demographic characteristics, personality traits, and attitudes that predict verdict preferences) is also discussed. The chapter concludes with a discussion of possible future directions for research on jury selection.
Aside · Excuse · Jury · Jury selection · Political science · Reasonable Doubt · Selection (genetic algorithm) · Verdict · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics · Jury Decision Making Processes · Law · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Philosophy · Psychology · Social Psychology
Scientific jury selection.
The Belief in a Just World
Racial Bias in Mock Juror Decision-Making
Multiple Processes by which Attitudes Guide Behavior
Race in the Courtroom
Public and private self-consciousness
The authoritarian personality
Attitudes and the Prediction of Behavior
Two Spheres of Belief in Justice
Aggregation and beyond
Responsibility attribution
Bias in jury selection
Effects of sex of defense attorney, sex of juror, and age and attractiveness of the victim on mock juror decision making in a rape case
The construction and validation of a juror bias scale
Jury selection in insanity defense cases
Juror honesty during the voir dire
The Effect of Peremptory Challenges on Jury and Verdict
Attitudes versus Actions
The role of categorization and in-group norms in judgments of groups and their members
Attitude accessibility as a moderator of the attitude-perception and attitude-behavior relations
On the consistency between attitudes and behavior
Attitude accessibility, attitude-behavior consistency, and the strength of the object-evaluation association
Physical aggression as a function of objective self-awareness and attitudes toward punishment
Attitudinal qualities relating to the strength of the attitude-behavior relationship
Race and jury selection
Attitude accessibility as a moderator of the attitude–perception and attitude–behavior relations
Scientific juror selection
Authoritarianism and decisions of mock juries
Expert psychological testimony in rape trials
Exploring the effects of attitudes toward the death penalty on capital sentencing verdicts
White juror bias
Defendant-juror similarity and mock juror judgments
Availability
Self-monitoring of expressive behavior
Experimental Research on Just-World Theory
Social Status in Jury Deliberations
Money, Sex, and Death
Judging Bias
Status and Competence of Jurors
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |