Scientific jury selection

Content sourced from Wikipedia, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.

Scientific jury selection (SJS) is when social scientists help lawyers pick juries they think will be favorable. It happens during the jury selection phase, which is when lawyers question potential jurors. Experts often assist with peremptory challenges—the right to exclude a juror without giving a reason.

What SJS is and isn’t
- It’s used mainly in the United States.
- It aims to identify juror backgrounds and attitudes that predict favorable verdicts and then guide which jurors to strike or keep.
- Its goal is to improve outcomes, especially in high-stakes civil cases, where large money is at stake.

Where it came from and how it works
- SJS grew from the work of social scientists like Fred Strodtbeck with the American Juries Project. They studied how individual jurors might influence group deliberations.
- Practitioners use methods such as surveys and mock trials to learn which traits or beliefs tend to favor a party in a given case.
- The idea is to use that information to select jurors whose attitudes align with the client’s case.

Effectiveness and concerns
- Studies show mixed results. The evidence presented at trial is usually the biggest factor in the verdict.
- SJS may have more impact when the evidence is unclear or ambiguous.
- Critics worry SJS can unfairly tilt juries toward the wealthy or powerful, since those who can pay for consultants may have more influence. Some reform proposals (like banning peremptory challenges) have been discussed but not adopted.

How jurors are excluded
- Challenge for cause: lawyers must explain why a juror shouldn’t serve (bias, conflict of interest). The judge decides.
- Peremptory challenge: lawyers strike a juror without giving a reason. The number is limited and varies by case.

Who does SJS today
- Many consultants are psychologists who specialize in legal psychology, but sociologists, marketing experts, and lawyers also work in the field.
- Since the 1980s, large trial consulting firms have grown, especially in big civil cases. Critics say this can increase money’s influence over trials.

What methods are used
- The two main tools are telephone surveys of the community and mock trials (simulated juries).
- Some practitioners also use in-court observations or other cues, though many psychologists consider some techniques unscientific.
- Consultants try to find patterns between jurors’ backgrounds, attitudes, and likely verdicts and then apply that to case-specific juries.

What research says about results
- It’s difficult to prove how much SJS changes outcomes because real trials are complex and hard to replicate in studies.
- In some cases, systematic methods help predict juror verdicts, especially when data is specific to the case and jurisdiction. In others, demographic data aren’t reliable predictors.
- Overall, the verdict is usually driven by the strength of the evidence, with SJS having a relatively modest effect.

Public discussion and culture
- Juries and jury consultants are common topics in books and TV shows, sometimes portrayed as powerful or controversial.

In short, scientific jury selection is a field that uses social science methods to influence jury choices, mainly in high-stakes civil cases. Its effectiveness is debated, and it raises questions about fairness and equal access to justice.