Jury Research - Research Methods

Research Methods

As can be seen from the above, there are a number of reasons juries and jurors have become the target of investigation by legal practitioners and social scientists. Often overlooked is that correlation between the focus of investigation role played in the criminal justice system of the investigator or instructing organisation/individual(s) funding the research. The terms of reference, for example, for jury research performed on behalf of a trial lawyer seeking a beneficial outcome for his or her client, will most probably differ to those of a psychologist investigating the influence of say gender, demographic and personality variables on trial outcomes, which again will most probably differ from an examination by concerned members of the Judiciary about the ability of jurors to understand the legal argument, complex forensic evidence and instructions by the legal representatives in the courtroom,.

Similarly methodology will differ depending on terms of reference, level of peer review, experience and ability of researchers and attitudes of funding organisations. Today, there are many companies and individuals providing services as jury consultants or trial strategists, & for links to three randomly selected organisations that provide such services]. Jury consultants utilise market research techniques in an attempt to bolster the client's chances of a positive outcome by 'gaining an understanding of the current and environment/location specific trends that might impact the attitudes of jurors. Their job is to shape trial team strategy so as to take advantage of or moderate jurors' preexisting beliefs and experiences byway of how the evidence is presented. Regular market research techniques are used in such instances (e.g., phone surveys, focus groups, feedback sessions etc.). Surrogate or mock jurors are selected carefully so that they are statistically representative of the 'general population in the particular region' and they are presented relevant information, visual exhibits, witness statements, legal cases, timelines etc. in an attempt to elicit a variety of responses, thus allowing the lawyers to prepare adequately for any possibility before it causes difficulty to their case. Jury consultants also utilise pre-trial techniques such as focus groups when preparing for settlement negotiations. Post-trial juror interviews sometimes allow for better understanding of mistakes or good arguments made in a trial, and that knowledge could be used for future trials or for an appeal. A recent innovation in this type of research is using electronic resources where lawyers 'pitch their submissions to online jurors'. More information about this resource can be found by following this link . Also on these pages are papers which outline some of the perceived benefits of this type of research along with the issues which are still topics of debate.

Jury consultancy is without doubt a growing industry and one which is utilising current technologies in inovative ways. However, this type of investigation makes up a relatively small proportion of Jury Research, the balance of which is generally conducted by psychologists, criminologists and other interested social scientists. As indicated above in dicussions about the personal perspective of jurors, the interaction between the juror and other jurors, the Courtroom environment, etc. is extaordinarily complex and unusual in that the behaviours and expectations of jurors whilct performing jury duty are disimilar to every day experiences. As such any research which focuses on the individual and collective processes of jurors in an attempt to gain a better understanding of how it is that they make their decisions and what factors influence such decisions must have strong theoretical and practical foundations. The tools of the social scientist have evolved over recent decades thus allowing the consideration of a multitude of variables when investigating a particular phenomenon or phenomena. This is augmented by the continuous development of computer programs that can perform complex multivariate and multilevel analyses of data and models quickly and with reletative ease and accuracy. Nonetheless, flaws inherent in social research must be considered, identified and moderated, and this is particularly relevant in Jury research.

There are effectively two methods by which jury research can be conducted, those being the utilisation of 'real jurors' or 'mock jurors'. Each of these methods have their downfalls and each provides a different 'slant' on the juror experience. The use of mock jurors has inherently been necessary because in most countries there are legislative restrictions placed on discussions by jurors of their deliberation process and/or their experience on the jury. Access to 'real jurors' therefore is difficult to attain and observation of jurors whilst performing their duty is prohibited for a variety of reasons the most prominent of which is a reluctance to allow any imposition on the jurors whilst performing their duty, the outcome of which could arugably cause an inaccurate outcome in the matter and possibilities of further legal **. As such access to jurors, if allowed, is generally after they have been dismissed which invokes difficutleis with issues such as memory distortion, overload from stress or other factors which were more pertnent to the juror whlst on the jury, inability to recognise the influence of demographic factors on their deliberations etc. These are all factors or variable which are difficult to tease out of the data, but the inluence of which can be adjusted in the analsys of the data if the model is theroitecally sound.

Mock jurors research does not provide an avenue for the investigation of the 'Gestalt' of the juror experience. Mock Jurors are not 'in the midst of the experience', they are not imposed upon by the reality that the future of the person sitting before them will in some respects be inluenced by them, their ability to concentrate, their attention to detail, their ability to negotiate with other jruors, etc. etc. These factors do impose on 'real jurors' and as such mock jury research provides for a simulation of the juror experience. Good for that which the jury consultant is seeking in terms of examining the general attitudes and beliefs of a community, but when investigating the nuances of the internal processes involved in deliberating an outcome of a Court matter, mock jury research techniques fall short in terms of validity. However, again, Mmck jury research has provided a significant pool of investigative pursuits and "since the 1970s as a result of considerable debate surround the issues associated with simiulated research, the design and metohological parameters of similuated jury research have been made more robust. --Drcrpsych (talk) 04:32, 17 December 2012 (UTC)