Scientific jury selection: Does it work?

Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Volumn 36, Issue 10, 2006, Pages 2417-2435

  Seltzer, Richard ^a  

^a HOWARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33748760322     PISSN: 00219029     EISSN: 15591816     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00110.x     Document Type: Review

References (46)

1. Anderson, J. F. (1998). Catch me if you can! Resolving the ethical tragedies in the brave new world of jury selection. New England Law Review, 32, 344-400.
2. Baldus, D. C., Woodworth, G., Zuckerman, D., Weiner, N. A., & Broffit, B. (2001). The use of peremptory challenges in capital murder trials: A legal and empirical analysis. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law, 3, 3-170.
3. Barber, J. W. (1994). The jury is still out: The role of jury science in the modern American courtroom. American Criminal Law Review, 31, 1225-1252.
4. Batson v. Kentucky 476, U.S. 79. (1986).
5. Bonazzoli, M. J. (1998). Jury selection and bias debunking invidious stereotypes through science. Quinnipiac Law Review, 18, 247-305.
6. Bornstein, B. H. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75-91.
7. Bowers, W. J., Steiner, B. D., & Sandys, M. (2001). Death sentencing in Black and White: An empirical analysis of the role of jurors, race, and jury racial composition. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law, 3, 171-274.
8. Brown, L. T., Jr. (2003). Racial discrimination injury selection: Professional misconduct, not legitimate advocacy. Review of Litigation, 22, 209-317.
9. Diamond, S. S. (1990). Scientific jury selection: What social scientists know and do not know. Judicature, 73, 178-183.
10. Diamond, S. S. (1997). Illuminations and shadows from jury simulations. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 561-571.
11. Eisenberg, T., Garvey, S. P., & Wells, M. T. (2001). The deadly paradox of capital jurors. Southern California Law Review, 74, 371-397.
12. Ellsworth, P. C. (1993). Some steps between attitudes and verdicts. In R. Hastie (Ed.), Inside the juror: The psychology of juror decision making (pp. 42-64). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13. Etzioni, A. (1974). Creating an imbalance. Trial, pp. 28, 30.
14. Feild, H. F., & Barnett, N. J. (1978). Simulated jury trials: Student vs. "real" people as jurors. Journal of Social Psychology, 104, 287-293.
15. Frederick, J. T. (1984). Social science involvement in voir dire: Preliminary data on the effectiveness of scientific jury selection. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 2, 375-394.
16. Fulero, S. M., & Penrod, S. D. (1990). The myths and reality of attorney jury selection folklore and scientific jury selection: What works? Ohio Northern University Law Review, 17, 229-253.
17. Hastie, R., Penrod, S. D., & Pennington, N. (1983). Inside the jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
18. Hepburn, J. R. (1980). The objective reality of evidence and the utility of systematic jury selection. Law and Human Behavior, 4, 89-101.
19. Hoffman, M. B. (1997). Peremptory challenges should be abolished: A trial judge's perspective. University of Chicago Law Review, 64, 809-871.
20. Hoffman, M. B. (1999). Abolishing peremptory challenges. Judicature, 82, 203.
21. Jonakait, R. N. (2003). The American jury system. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
22. King, N. J. (1993). Post-conviction review of jury discrimination: Measuring the effects of juror race on jury decisions. Michigan Law Review, 92, 63-130.
23. Krauss, E., & Bonora, B. (2003). Jurywork: Systematic techniques. New York: Clark Boardman.
24. Kressel, N. J., & Kressel, D. F. (2002). Stack and sway: The new science of jury consulting. Boulder, CO: Westview.
25. Lane, M. E. (1999). Twelve carefully selected not so angry men: Are jury consultants destroying the American legal system? Suffolk University Law Review, 32, 463-480.
26. Lilly, G. C. (2001). The decline of the American jury. University of Colorado Law Review, 72, 53-91.
27. McConahay, J. B., Mullin, C. J., & Frederick, J. (1977). The uses of social science in trials with political and racial overtones: The trial of Joan Little. Law and Contemporary Problems, 41, 205-229.
28. Mills, C. J., & Bohannon, W. E. (1980). Juror characteristics: To what extent are they related to jury verdicts? Judicature, 64, 23-31.
29. Montz, V. T., & Montz, C. L. (2000). The Peremptory challenge: Should it still exist? An examination of federal and Florida law. University of Miami Law Review, 54, 451-495.
30. Moran, G., & Comfort, J. C. (1982). Scientific jury selection: Sex as moderator of demographic and personality predictors of impaneled felony juror behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 1052-1063.
31. Patterson, A. H. (1986). Scientific jury selection: The need for a case-specific approach. Social Action and the Law, 11, 105-109.
32. Penrod, S. (1980). Study of attorney and scientific jury selection models. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University.
33. Rachlinski, J. J. (1993). Scientific jury selection and the equal protection rights of venire persons. Pacific Law Review, 24, 1497-1566.
34. Rose, M. R. (2003). The jury in practice: A voir dire of voir dire. Listening to jurors' views regarding the peremptory challenge. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 78, 1061-1098.
35. Sachs, P. (1997, March/April). Standardized testing: Meritocracy's crooked yardstick. Change, 24-31.
36. Saks, M. J. (1976). The limits of scientific jury selection: Ethical and empirical. Jurimetrics, 3, 3-22.
37. Saks, M. J. (1997). What do jury experiments tell us about how juries (should) make decisions? Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal, 6, 1-53.
38. Schulman, J., Shaver, P., Coleman, R., Emrich, B., & Christie, R. (1973). Recipe for a jury. Psychology Today, 37(6), 37-44.
39. Seltzer, R., Venuti, M. A., & Lopes, G. M. (1991). Juror honesty during the voir dire. Journal of Criminal Justice, 19, 451-462.
40. Smith, R. C., & Seltzer, R. (2000). Contemporary controversies and the American racial divide. Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield.
41. Sommers, S. R., & Ellsworth, P. C. (2000). Race in the courtroom: Perceptions of guilt and dispositional attributions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1367-1379.
42. Sommers, S. R., & Ellsworth, P. C. (2001). White juror bias: An investigation of prejudice against Black defendants in the American courtroom. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 201-229.
43. Strier, F. (1999). Whither trial consulting? Issues and projections. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 93-115.
44. Strier, F., & Shestowsky, D. (1999). Profiling the profilers: A study of the trial consulting profession, its impact on trial justice, and what, if anything, to do about it. Wisconsin Law Review, 3, 441-499.
45. Visher, C. A. (1987). Juror decision making: The importance of evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 11, 1-17.
46. Zeisel, H., & Diamond, S. S. (1978). The effect of peremptory challenges on jury and verdict: An experiment in a federal district court. Stanford Law Review, 30, 491-531.