What psychological issues affect jury selection and deliberation?

Judges’ Trials and Psychological Significance

Judges’ trials are crucial in the law, and they are of great significance to psychologists. Social psychology ideas address how specific jurors see, analyze, and recall evidence, as well as team activities in jury deliberation. Several psychological variables influence jury selection and deliberation. They concern jury thinking, memory, judgment and decision-making, attribution of various pieces of evidence, persuasion, and group behavior (Bennett 345). During group processes, the distribution of special pre-deliberation verdicts is the best predictor of jury decision. When there is a misunderstanding, normative influence from judges usually takes over. A forensic psychologist is used in the selection of juries by use of a scientific method that identifies information that is useful to provoke a dire process and to depend on when deciding which jurors to choose.

Psychological Factors Affecting Jury Deliberation

What might psychological factors affect how juries deliberate and make decisions?

The decision-making process for panels is affected by some factors that include the personality of the juror. A juror with an authoritative figure, line minded, keen and conservative is more likely to find the suspects guilty. The racist perception of some jurors can influence the final decision. Research that was conducted exhibited that jurors had a tendency of convicting black defendants criminal than white suspects when the two parties were accused of the same crime. The appealing nature of the defendant can also play a part in determining the final verdict. The more attractive a respondent is, the more lenient the defendant may appear to be. Social influence is another factor that determines the final decision (Bennett 345). The juror may tend to make the decision based on majority control.

Addressing Issues to Make Jury Trials a More Fair Process

Do you think there any issues that psychologist could help address to make jury trials a more fair process?

Many problems need to be focused on to make the process much fair. Most current jury trials are based on ethnicity, races, and gender. The aspect of diversity has not been well balanced in the three sectors. The psychologist can play a vital role in making sure that equality in all dimensions has been addressed adequately (Massaro 45). Most black suspects have been found guilty even when there is no substantial evidence to prove the case. The issue is because the juries who declare a verdict against them are white judges who perceive black people as always culprits to the criminal offense. Another aspect that is worth being focused on is the fact that gender balance has not been achieved. There are more women jurors than men. The issues have proclaimed that jury selection is a long and manipulated by attorneys who seek to select their allies as jurors. Peremptory challenges are used against African Americans from practicing as jurors.

Fixing the Issues and Implementing Changes

If so, how would you go about fixing these issues I they could make any changes you wanted if not why not?

The federal government needs to amend and redefine the clauses that canvas the issues of concern and impose substantial penalties in the form of fines and even imprisonment for the transgressors to advocate for such matters; the stringent regulations will curtail such discrimination vices in the court of laws. Additionally, transparency in jury selection should be conducted by independent parties. The parties will ensure that there is no manipulation of the process whatsoever and that fairness is struke in all jury trials proceedings. The implementers of the clause should be vetted to ascertain the integrity levels.

Works cited

Bennett, Mark W. “Unraveling the Gordian Knot of Implicit Bias in Jury Selection: The Problem of Judge-Dominated Voir Dire, the Failed Promise of Batson, and Proposed Solutions.” (2010). p345

Massaro, Toni M. “Experts, psychology, credibility, and rape: The rape trauma syndrome issue and its implications for expert psychological testimony.” (2015). P45