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.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abbott, W. F. (1987).Analytic Juror Rater. Philadelphia: American Law Institute.
Centers, R., Shomers, R., & Rodrigues, A. (1970). A field experiment in interpersonal persuasion using authoritative influence.Journal of Personality, 38, 392–403.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Jurow, G. (1971). New data on the effect of a death qualified jury on the guilt determination process.Harvard Law Review, 84, 567–611.
Kalven, H. & Zelsel, H. (1966).The American Jury. Boston: Little, Brown.
Mauet, T. A. (1996).Trial Techniques (4th Ed.). New York: Aspen Law Business.
Mertz, R., Miller, G., & Balance, L. (1966). Open- and closed-mindedness and cognitive conflict.Journalism Quarterly, 43, 429–433.
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.
Saks, M. (1976). Social scientists can't rig juries.Psychology Today, 9, 48–50, 55–57.
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.
Snortum, R.J., & Ashear, V.H. (1972). Prejudice, punitiveness, and personality.Journal of Personality Assessment, 36, 292–296.
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.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights 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
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02802603