Skip to main content
Log in

Prediction of first ballot mock jury votes by the Analytic Juror Rater

  • Published:
Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Two scales of Abbott's (1987) Analytic Juror Rater (AJR) were used with 24 mock jurors to predict first ballot mock jury votes. Each participant observed one of two mock trial proceedings involving an actual second degree murder case. In a moot courtroom, they heard arguments from attorneys and witnessed examination of the defendant and actors portraying witnesses. The Cosmopolitan Lifestyle Scale of the AJR successfully predicted first ballot votes of participants (p<.02), while the Non-Authoritarian Scale showed a non-significant trend in the hypothesized direction. It was concluded that, in cases where evidence is not strong, the AJR may lend modest assistance to the attorney using peremptory challenge to eliminatevenire members who may be biased against a defendant.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbott, W. F. (1987).Analytic Juror Rater. Philadelphia: American Law Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Centers, R., Shomers, R., & Rodrigues, A. (1970). A field experiment in interpersonal persuasion using authoritative influence.Journal of Personality, 38, 392–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowan, C. L., Thompson, W. C., & Ellsworth, P. C. (1984). The effects of death qualification on juror's predisposition to convict and on the quality of deliberation.Law & Human Behavior, 8(1–2), 53–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellsworth, P. C., Bukaty, R. M., & Cowan, C. L. (1984). The death qualified jury and the defense of insanity.Law & Human Behavior, 8 (1–2), 81–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filkins, J. W., Smith, C. M., & Tindale, R. S. (1998). An evaluation of the biasing effects of death qualification: A meta-analytic/computer simulation approach. In T. S. Tindale & L. Heath (Eds.),Theory and Research on Small Groups: Social Psychological Applications to Social Issues, Vol. 4. New York: Plenum Press, pp 153–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haney, C. (1984). On the selection of capital juries: The biasing effects of the death-qualification process.Law & Human Behavior, 8 (1–2), 121–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jurow, G. (1971). New data on the effect of a death qualified jury on the guilt determination process.Harvard Law Review, 84, 567–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalven, H. & Zelsel, H. (1966).The American Jury. Boston: Little, Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauet, T. A. (1996).Trial Techniques (4th Ed.). New York: Aspen Law Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mertz, R., Miller, G., & Balance, L. (1966). Open- and closed-mindedness and cognitive conflict.Journalism Quarterly, 43, 429–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, H. E., & Byrne, D. (1973). The defendant's dilemma: Effects of juror's attitudes and authoritarianism on judicial decisions.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25(1), 123–129.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Saks, M. (1976). Social scientists can't rig juries.Psychology Today, 9, 48–50, 55–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandys, M., & Dillehay, R. C. (1995). First ballot votes, predeliberation dispositions, and final verdicts in jury trials.Law and Human Behavior, 19(2), 175–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snortum, R.J., & Ashear, V.H. (1972). Prejudice, punitiveness, and personality.Journal of Personality Assessment, 36, 292–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, W., Cowan, C., Ellsworth, P., & Harrington, J. (1984). Death penality attitudes and conviction proneness: The translation of attitudes into verdicts.Law and Human Behavior, 8, 95–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pettigrew, C.G., Unglesby, L. Prediction of first ballot mock jury votes by the Analytic Juror Rater. J Police Crim Psych 18, 9–14 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02802603

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02802603

Keywords

Navigation