Race and juries: The effects of race-salience and racial composition on individual and group decision-making.

Abstract

The present study used a realistic jury simulation to examine the relationship between race and legal decision-making. As the experiment began, White and Black mock jurors were given a <italic>voir dire</italic> questionnaire. Half of the jurors were asked race-relevant questions (e.g., about their racial attitudes) and half received a questionnaire without racial questions. All jurors were then shown the video summary of a criminal trial involving a Black defendant. Jurors deliberated as six-person juries, half of which were racially-mixed (four Whites and two Blacks) and half of which were all-White. Jurors' private opinions about the case were assessed before and after deliberations. Three main areas of inquiry were explored. First, the influence of race-relevant <italic> voir dire</italic> questions was assessed. Consistent with previous findings that Whites are less likely to convict a Black defendant when racial issues are salient at trial (Sommers & Ellsworth, 2000, 2001), White jurors' judgments were more lenient after having answered race-relevant <italic>voir dire</italic> questions. Contrary to previous results, <italic>voir dire</italic> had a similar effect on Black jurors. These findings demonstrate that <italic> voir dire</italic> can make salient jurors' concerns about racial bias, thereby influencing their subsequent trial judgments. Second, the influence of jury racial composition was examined. Results indicated that Black jurors were more lenient towards the Black defendant than White jurors. Among Whites, jurors on racially-mixed juries were more lenient than jurors on all-White juries. Racially-mixed juries also had longer deliberations, discussed more case facts, and were more likely to have substantive conversations regarding race than were all-White juries. These findings suggest that jury racial composition influences jurors through both informational and motivational processes. Third, the effects of deliberations on jurors' private trial judgments were measured. The leniency shift hypothesis was supported, as jurors' trial judgments became more lenient after deliberations. This effect did not vary by <italic>voir dire</italic> condition, jury racial composition, or juror race. General discussion of the present results focuses on implications for the legal system and for the ongoing psychological investigation of race and social judgment. Future directions for research on race in the courtroom are also considered.