Citation

Frederick JT. Behav. Sci. Law 1984; 2(4): 375-394.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1984, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1002/bsl.2370020405

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The validity of what has been termed "scientific" or "systematic" jury selection (SJS) techniques is addressed using data from two actual cases; one criminal and one civil. Data from the highly publicized Joan Little trial indicated that where validity data were available for the survey approach and in-court rating of authoritarianism, these techniques measured what they purported to measure. Validation data were not available for a third technique--in-court rating of nonverbal communication. Data from the civil case indicated that the survey approach could successfully predict verdicts of mock jurors. It is concluded that while these data are suggestive of the validity of two of the techniques used in SJS, more rigorous tests are essential before conclusions can be drawn.

Language: en