What are we studying? Student jurors, community jurors, and construct validity

Area of Science:

• Psychology
• Law
• Sociology

Background:

• Mock jury research often uses undergraduate students, raising concerns about generalizability.
• Understanding demographic differences in legal judgments is crucial for accurate research.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare culpability evaluations between student and community mock jurors.
• To investigate how explicit biases influence judgments in homicide and sexual assault cases.

Main Methods:

• 120 students and 99 community members evaluated homicide and sexual assault cases.
• Explicit attitude measures assessed biases related to sexual assault, defendants, and homicide adjudication.
• Culpability judgments included guilt likelihood and argument persuasiveness.

Main Results:

• Student and community participants displayed distinct biases on explicit attitude measures.
• These attitudinal differences translated into varied culpability judgments for sexual assault and homicide.
• Student mock jurors were found to be more lenient in assigning guilt for homicide cases.

Conclusions:

• Demographic differences significantly affect mock juror decision-making.
• Findings underscore the need for caution when generalizing student-based mock jury research.
• Future research should consider diverse participant pools for enhanced ecological validity.