Friends of the Behavioral Economics Club, this week we present the paper “Cognitive and human factors in legal layperson decision making: sources of bias in juror decision making”, by Curley, L. J.; Munro, J. and Dror, I. E. (2022), in which authors revise previous literature about the biases that influence the jury of a trial when they have to decide whether somebody is guilty or not.
Jury members are lay people (that is, without knowledge of the law or relationship with it), who must listen to the evidence of the different cases to evaluate them and reach a verdict impartially and without prejudice.
This is so because defendants have the right of having a fair trial and any biased influence can undermine this right and the jury’s decision making.
Despite this, there is a great variety of biases that influence the members of the jury when it comes to reaching a verdict, understanding bias as a factor that generates a preference towards a certain result.
It is important to study the biases that influence the jury because if they make incorrect decisions they can lead to injustice. It would not be the first time that several jurors have acknowledged making decisions before hearing all the evidence, thus highlighting that bias can influence jury judgments.
Previous research has already discussed different factors that can influence the appearance of biases, for example, beliefs and attitudes prior to the trial or interpretations of the evidence that are already biased by expert witnesses.
One of the reasons why having a jury in a trial is recommended by some people, is because it is believed that in this way individual biases are counteracted. However, for this to happen, certain conditions must be met.
With a practical example it is much clearer: if half of the people on the jury believe that black people are more likely to commit crimes, the other half should believe that white people are more likely to commit crimes. With this we deduce that it is not so easy to produce that balance.
The objective of this article was, therefore, to evaluate the appearance of biases at different stages of the trial: before, during and after the presentation of evidence.
Some of the biases that can be found in the early stages of the trial are the propensity to conviction, an overconfidence in the system, cynicism towards the defense, a need for social justice, racial prejudice or the belief of an innate tendency to criminality.
There is also partiality, which can enter the courtroom because of prior publicity about the case. A few years ago, the media provided biased information only in very specific cases or when they were about famous people. However, with the advent of today’s technological advances, jurors may receive biased information from the vast majority of cases and, moreover, from many Internet sources, which makes it easier for this biased information to influence their judgment and their opinion.
On the other hand, “cognitive bias” appears, which is a hyperonym that can be used to describe the subjective perceptions of people that can influence the decisions they make and how they interact with the world. This occurs because the human being has a limited cognitive capacity and therefore seeks efficiency when making decisions, and on the other hand, because of personal experiences.
Previous research has also shown that the interaction between cognitive bias and characteristics of the defendant and victim can impact jury decision making. For example, ethnic minorities are more likely to receive guilty verdicts, due to how the media associates them with crime.
Authors propose to improve the testimony of expert witnesses with different strategies, in order to mitigate the effects of bias. For example, provide additional training to help experts communicate their testimony in a logical way that leaves no room for doubt, or hire independent experts who are not associated with either side of the process.
Another recommendation is for a team of psychologists to educate jurors and legal professionals about the impacts of bias and the contextual information that is irrelevant for their tasks in trials. For the members of the jury, authors propose a short video that could be shown to them before the trial.
Authors consider that, due to the importance of the consequences that can occur after a wrong decision by jurors, more research should be done on how they can protect themselves from the influence of bias.
If you want to know more about Behavioral Economics and how to apply it to human behavior, take a look to our Certificate in Behavioral Economics, a formative program, in English or Spanish, 100% online and certified by Heritage University (USA). Now, with discounts for members of this club.
