English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Criminal defendants have a 6th Amendment right to an impartial jury, but customary methods of jury selection often fail to uncover deeply held juror attitudes. Addressing the death penalty as a polarizing issue, the Juror Questionnaire of Values and Viewpoints (JQVV) was validated and cross-validated with two separate MTurk studies of capital jury-eligible adults. With complete anonymity assured by MTurk, Study 1 assessed death-penalty attitudes for 354 juror-eligible participants and their likelihood of mispresenting their views during voir dire. Validity of the JQVV was assessed with the Pretrial Juror Attitude Questionnaire (PJAQ) and predicted differences for Support-Death and Support-Life group. Study 2, with an entirely new sample of 313 juror-eligible adults, cross-validated the JQVV and tested the effects of positive impression management (PIM). Importantly, Support-Death mostly expressed their candid views even with the PIM condition. Although Support-Life frequently denied their death-penalty views, the JQVV Prosecution-Cynicism (Pro-Cyn) scale proved moderately effective at identifying their denials. Professional implications for capital jury selection are discussed.

Perspectives of juror-eligible adults: validation of the Juror Questionnaire of Values and Viewpoints (JQVV) for capital cases