This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In legal contexts, confirmation is particularly relevant as it can significantly influence jury selection and the overall fairness of the legal process. In this article we will lay the foundation for our deeper exploration of confirmation bias in jury selection and litigation , which will be covered in subsequent blog articles.
If we assume people do not mindlessly consume pre-trial publicity but engage with case coverage and use that to formulate an opinion about a persons guilt or innocence, then it is likely that jurydeliberation will be impacted by confirmation bias. Scientific jury selection: Does it work?
In legal contexts, confirmation is particularly relevant as it can significantly influence jury selection and the overall fairness of the legal process. This article will lay the foundation for our deeper exploration of confirmation bias in jury selection and litigation, which will be covered in subsequent blog articles.
We discussed how bias can lead to biased evaluations of evidence and witness testimony and the tendency to favor information that aligns with pre-existing beliefs during jurydeliberations. The results can also inform oral voir dire strategies.
We discussed how bias can lead to biased evaluations of evidence and witness testimony, as well as the tendency to favor information that aligns with preexisting beliefs during jurydeliberations. The results can also inform oral voir dire strategies.
We discussed how bias can lead to biased evaluations of evidence and witness testimony, as well as the tendency to favor information that aligns with preexisting beliefs during jurydeliberations. The results can also inform oral voir dire strategies.
Juror misconduct, encompassing any inappropriate or illegal conduct that undermines the jury’s function, can include communication with external parties, researching the case outside the courtroom, or harboring prejudice. Jurydeliberation secrecy is safeguarded to maintain fairness and prevent undue influence.
Juror misconduct, encompassing any inappropriate or illegal conduct that undermines the jury’s function, can include communication with external parties, researching the case outside the courtroom, or harboring prejudice. Jurydeliberation secrecy is safeguarded to maintain fairness and prevent undue influence.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content