The effects of jury size and polling method on the process and product of jury deliberation
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6206659 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Norbert L Kerr (0000-0003-0115-0767, Michigan State University), Robert J Maccoun (0000-0003-0929-4423) |
| Year | 1985 |
| Volume | 48 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 349-363 |
| Publication date | 1985-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0022-3514 • E-ISSN: 1939-1315 |
| Publisher | American Psychological Association (APA) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1037//0022-3514.48.2.349 |
| PMID | 3981399 |
| OpenAlex | W2132279210 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 49 |
| References cited | 7 |
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly assumed the functional equivalence of different sized juries (at least in the range of 6- to 12-person groups). Several formal models of jury decision making predict that larger juries should hang more often, particularly for very close cases. Failures to confirm this prediction in several previous studies were attributed to inadequate sample sizes or to insufficiently close cases. An experimental simulation study that minimized these problems was undertaken to test the models' prediction. Social decision scheme and social transition scheme analyses permitted comparisons of the decision-making processes of the different-sized mock juries. The effect of the method used to poll group members' verdict preferences was also examined. As group size increased, the observed probability of a hung jury increased significantly. No process differences between 6- and 12-person groups were detected, but 3-person groups did exhibit several process differences from the larger groups. When cases were very close, the likelihood of a hung jury for typically sized juries was found to be lower when the group was polled by secret ballot than when a show-of-hands polling method was used.
Ballot · Deliberation · Group Decision Making · Hung jury · Jury · Political science · Politics · Polling · Process (computing) · Product (mathematics) · Secret ballot · Verdict · Voting · Computer Science · Game Theory and Voting Systems · Jury Decision Making Processes · Law · Opinion Dynamics and Social Influence · Psychology · Social Psychology
Expressions of Colour-Blind Racism Within All-White and Racially-Heterogeneous Mock Jury Deliberations
Conservation of Information
Jury decision making
Dissensions et consensus
Reacting to Rape
Using Facebook Messenger versus Groups for News Engagement
Twelve (not so) angry men
Is the leniency asymmetry really dead? Misinterpreting asymmetry effects in criminal jury deliberation
Scientific inquiry on how groups decide
Choosing None of the Above
Asymmetrical Social Influence in Freely Interacting Groups Discussing the Death Penalty
Motivated information processing and group decision refusal
A ‘Special’ Delivery? Exploring the Impact of Screens, Live-Links and Video-Recorded Evidence on Mock Juror Deliberation in Rape Trials
The Demon Drink and the Demonized Woman
Jurors' intuitive rules for deliberation
Asymmetric influence in mock jury deliberation
On racial diversity and group decision making
Effects of group size and procedural influence on consensual judgments of quantity
Procedural influence in small-group decision making
Coalition Cabinet Decision Making
The burden of social proof
Asymmetrical social influence in freely interacting groups
Procedural influence in two-step group decision making
Collective induction
Effects of straw polls on group decision making
Lifting the Veil
The optimal jury size when jury deliberation follows a random walk
A quota jury
How Minorities Prevail
Gaining and losing social support
Taking the easy way out
| Unique citing works | 31 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,26 |
| Citation span | 1987 - 2026 (40) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 46 |