NCJ Number
171324
Journal
Law and Human Behavior Volume: 21 Issue: 5 Dated: (October 1997) Pages: 561-571
Date Published
1997
Length
11 pages
Annotation
This article evaluates how well jury simulations reflect jury decisionmaking.
Abstract
While jury simulations in general represent a significant improvement over informal nonempirical speculation about jury behavior, the more ecologically valid features of recent simulations increase both the quality and the persuasiveness of simulation results. Still missing, however, are theories and a database that will signal when these more elaborate and expensive design features are crucial. The article identifies and discusses in detail six methodological characteristics typical of jury simulation studies that might reduce the validity of conclusions drawn from that research: (1) inadequate sampling; (2) inadequate trial simulations; (3) lack of jury deliberation; (4) inappropriate dependent variables; (5) lack of corroborative field data; and (6) the nature of decisions based on role-playing. Courts are not, in general, unfriendly to simulation research, but they are skeptical about the weight they should give simulation research. It is incumbent upon researchers to continue testing various methodologies in order to convince indifferent courts that jury simulation research can provide informative and accurate data not available by other means. Notes, references