Premium
Explaining Jury Verdicts: Is Leniency Bias for Real?
Author(s) -
Devine Dennis J.,
Olafson Kristi M.,
Jarvis Larita L.,
Bott Jennifer P.,
Clayton Laura D.,
Wolfe Jami M. T.
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
journal of applied social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.822
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1559-1816
pISSN - 0021-9029
DOI - 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02691.x
Subject(s) - verdict , jury , deliberation , psychology , social psychology , acquittal , preference , law , political science , statistics , mathematics , politics
Laboratory research suggests juries that begin deliberation with a strong majority (i.e., 2/3 or more) usually end up choosing the verdict favored by this majority, whereas those without a strong majority generally acquit or hang. We tested the robustness of these findings in the field by examining trial and deliberation correlates of jury verdicts using data from 79 criminal jury trials held in Indiana. As expected, several trial characteristics and the first‐vote preference distribution were related to jury verdicts. However, there was no evidence of leniency bias—75% of those juries without a 2/3 majority on the first deliberation vote ended up convicting. Contributions of the study, limitations, and alternative explanations for the observed severity bias are discussed.