Factors Influencing Jury Decision-Making
Attractiveness:
Race:
David Abwender and Kenyatta Hough 2001
Mark Bradbury and Marian Williams 2013
considered a number of factors on jury
suggests ethnic group matters.
decision-making, including physical
Found that juries compromised of
attractiveness.
predominantly white jurors were more likely
Attractiveness Leniency Hypothesis - ALE.
to convict black defendants as were juries
207 participants in the study were all asked
made up of mostly Hispanic jurors.
to judge the guilt of and recommended
Jeffery Pfeifer and James Ogloff 1991
sentence for the imaginary cases of a
found participants overwhelmingly rate
drunk driver who drove recklessly and killed
black defendants guiltier than white
a pedestrian.
defendants, especially when the victim is
The female participants were more lenient
white.
towards an attractive female defendant,
and less lenient towards an unattractive
defendant. Accent:
Male participants displayed the opposite John Dixon et al 2002 investigated the
tendency. effect of a regional accent on the
Halo effect - when one trait of a person or attribution of guilt.
thing is used to make an overall judgement Played a tape of a policeman and the male
of them. suspect.
One tape had a Birmingham accent the
Pre-trial Publicity: other was a normal English accent.
Nancy Steblay et al 1999 reviewed past Ratings of guilt were significantly higher in
research and concluded that pre-trial relation to the Birmingham accent,
publicity (PTP), for example the TV news, suggesting this is a further factor that may
may have a negative influence on jurors’ influence jury decision-making.
judgements of defendant guilt.
Procedure:
44 studies involving 5755 participants in
Evaluation
a mock-jury trial or questionnaires. Strength:
Negative information was given and It is ethical.
asked to decide on whether the Most studies of jury decision-making and
defendant was guilty or innocent, pre-trial publicity involve mock juries and
Findings: ‘imaginary’ cases.
Those who were exposed to negative pre- Allows researchers to manipulate variables in
trial publicity were significantly more a way that would not be practical or ethical
likely to return a guilty verdict. in a real trial.
Conclusion: PTP leads people to be more Means that extra ;egal factors can be
likely to reach a guilty judgement, especially analysed without prejudicing the outcome of
related to certain conditions. a real trial.
Attractiveness:
Race:
David Abwender and Kenyatta Hough 2001
Mark Bradbury and Marian Williams 2013
considered a number of factors on jury
suggests ethnic group matters.
decision-making, including physical
Found that juries compromised of
attractiveness.
predominantly white jurors were more likely
Attractiveness Leniency Hypothesis - ALE.
to convict black defendants as were juries
207 participants in the study were all asked
made up of mostly Hispanic jurors.
to judge the guilt of and recommended
Jeffery Pfeifer and James Ogloff 1991
sentence for the imaginary cases of a
found participants overwhelmingly rate
drunk driver who drove recklessly and killed
black defendants guiltier than white
a pedestrian.
defendants, especially when the victim is
The female participants were more lenient
white.
towards an attractive female defendant,
and less lenient towards an unattractive
defendant. Accent:
Male participants displayed the opposite John Dixon et al 2002 investigated the
tendency. effect of a regional accent on the
Halo effect - when one trait of a person or attribution of guilt.
thing is used to make an overall judgement Played a tape of a policeman and the male
of them. suspect.
One tape had a Birmingham accent the
Pre-trial Publicity: other was a normal English accent.
Nancy Steblay et al 1999 reviewed past Ratings of guilt were significantly higher in
research and concluded that pre-trial relation to the Birmingham accent,
publicity (PTP), for example the TV news, suggesting this is a further factor that may
may have a negative influence on jurors’ influence jury decision-making.
judgements of defendant guilt.
Procedure:
44 studies involving 5755 participants in
Evaluation
a mock-jury trial or questionnaires. Strength:
Negative information was given and It is ethical.
asked to decide on whether the Most studies of jury decision-making and
defendant was guilty or innocent, pre-trial publicity involve mock juries and
Findings: ‘imaginary’ cases.
Those who were exposed to negative pre- Allows researchers to manipulate variables in
trial publicity were significantly more a way that would not be practical or ethical
likely to return a guilty verdict. in a real trial.
Conclusion: PTP leads people to be more Means that extra ;egal factors can be
likely to reach a guilty judgement, especially analysed without prejudicing the outcome of
related to certain conditions. a real trial.
