SUBSCRIBE via RSSSUBSCRIBE via Email

A M E R I C A N S O C I E T Y O F T R I A L C O N S U L T A N T S

A BiMonthly E-Journal

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 1

Excerpt from Volume 24, Issue 3, May 2012

The Jury

EXPERT

Subtle Contextual Influenceson Racial Bias in the Courtroom

By Karenna F. Malavanti, Megan K. Johnson,Wade C. roWatt and Charles a. Weaver, iii

Karenna Malavanti is a doctoral student in Experimental Psychology at Baylor University in Waco, TX. Her professional interests are in the areas of cognitive psychology, juror decision-making, eyewit-ness memory, and social cognition. She presented juror decision-making research at the 2011 annual meeting of the Psychonomics Society. Karenna enjoys reading novels and is actively involved with an animal rescue group in McLennan County.

Megan Johnson is a post-doctoral fellow at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine (Cancer Prevention and Control Program). Her professional interests are in the areas of social psychology, statistics, health psychology, and the psychology of religion. Dr. Johnson enjoys cooking, traveling, and run-ning. Her recent research and contact information is available on her webpage.

Wade C. Rowatt is an Associate Professor of Psychology at Baylor University. His professional in-terests are in the areas of social-personality psychology and the psychology of religion. Dr. Rowatt enjoys running and playing basketball. His recent research and contact information is available on his webpage.

Charles A. Weaver III is currently a Professor of Psychology and Neurosciences. His research inter-ests are memory and cognition. He has served as a forensic expert, primarily in the area of eyewitness identification, in civil and criminal courts in more than 25 states. Dr. Weaver is a rabid Texas Rang-ers fan, still recovering from Game 6 of the World Series.

Racialdifferencesareimmediatelyapparenttomostpeopleandareknowntoinfluenceindividu-als’ judgmentsabout racialminorities.For instance, race impacts jurydeliberationsand thuscannotbeignoredinthecourtroom.Racialbiasesinthecourtroomareneithernewnorrare,andtheyplayaspecialroleinjurydeliberationsandcourtcases.Forexample,in2009,theNorthCarolinaGeneralAs-semblypassedtheRacialJusticeAct,whichalloweddeathrowinmatestoappealtheirsentencesiftheybelievedraceplayedasignificantroleintheirsentencing.Ifthedefendantcanprovethatracewasasig-nificantfactorinhisorhersentencing,thedeathpenaltyiscommutedtoalifesentencewithoutparole.

T H E J U R Y E X P E R T

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 2

Muchresearchhasfocusedonthedirecteffectsofracialbiasinjurordecision-making(Sommers&Ellsworth,2001),yetmostresearchhasoverlookedthesubtleinfluencesofone’senvironmentonjurordecision-making.Subtlecontextualcues,suchasaBibleincourt,mayindirectlyinfluencejurordecision-making.Thepurposeofthisarticleistoreviewpossibleeffectsofdefendantraceandsubtleenvironmentalfactors,suchasreligiouscontextcues,onjurorevaluationsanddecisions.GiventhatexposuretoreligiousconceptshasbeenshowntoincreaseracialprejudicetowardAfrican-Americans(Johnson,Rowatt,&Labouff,2010),itispossiblethesereligiousenvironmentalcuesalsoincreaseracialbiasinthecourtroom.

Implicit Factors in Juror Decision-Making

Historically,a“rational”viewofjurydecision-makingwaspopularlyaccepted.Thatis,jurorswereassumedtobelogical,non-biasedlisteners,waitinguntilallavailableevidencewaspresentedbeforeattemptingarationalprocessofdeliberation.However,researchindicatesthisprocessdoesnotcharacterizehumandecision-making.Instead,jurorstendtobeinfluencedbyavarietyofbiases,notallofwhichareconscious.Roberts(2012)suggeststhatonerecoursetoaddresstheseimplicitbiasesisthrougheducation,particularlyearlyintheselectionprocess.Thisisparticularlyimportantgiventhat90%ofjurorsfavoraverdictpriortodeliberation(Hastie,Penrod,&Pennington,1983). Thisearly“inoculation”isnecessarybecauseofthetop-downmannerinwhichajurorreachesaverdict,a3-stageexplanation-basedprocesscalledtheStoryModel(Pennington&Hastie,1986).Ac-cordingtotheStoryModel,jurorsinitiallytaketheevidencepresentedandcreateanarrativestorytoexplaintheirinitialimpressions.Second,thejurorusespossibleverdictalternativesasend-resultdeci-sioncategories.Third,jurorstrytofindthebestfitbetweentheirnarrativestory—whichisinternallycoherent,butnotnecessaryaccurate—andtheverdictcategory.Theverdictwiththebestfit tothestoryistheverdictchosenbythejuror.Ratherthanallowingfactstodictateadecision,jurorstendtoassimilatefactsinlightofthedecision.Consistentfactsareweighedheavily.Inconsistentfactaremini-mizedorevenignored.Inatrialscenario,racialbiases,manyofwhichareimplicit,impactnarrativestoriesfromtheoutset.Hence,jurorsmayadopttheirstoryorschemabyusingrace. Biasescanalsoimpactjurydeliberations.Intheory,juriesareusedbyourcourtsystembecausewebelievepollingindividuals’onatopicwillgenerateamorecompleteandlessbiasedassessmentoftheevidencepresented.Furthermore,weassumegroupconsensusleadstolesserror.Jurorsarenot“blankslates,”however.Theycometotrialwithbeliefsandknowledgethatinfluencestheirdecision-makingimplicitly(Devenport,Stedbaker,&Penrod,1999).Forinstance,individuals’knowledgeofaculturalstereotypeofblackindividualsasaggressiveanddangerousiscorrelatedwiththeirlikelihoodofshootinganarmedblackindividualquickerthananarmedwhiteindividualinashootervideogame(Correll,Park, Judd,&Wittenbrink, 2002).Thus,knowledgeofnegative cultural stereotypesaboutAfrican-Americansmight influence jurors’perceptionsofAfrican-Americansasmoreviolentorag-gressiveand,asaresult, thecorrespondingconviction. Inaddition,attitudesofone jurorcanofteninfluenceotherjurors’attitudes(Vohs&Luce,2010). Althougheducationcanhelpaddressimplicitbiases(Roberts,2012),someattemptstoaddressracial bias aremade through jury selection. For example, thePretrial JurorAttitudeQuestionnaire(PJAQ;Lecci&Myers,2008)canbeusedtomeasureracialattitudesofpotential jurors.Thisinstru-

T H E J U R Y E X P E R T

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 3

mentcontainssubscalesmeasuringracialbias,innatecriminality,socialjustice,convictionproneness,systemconfidence,andcynicismtowardthedefense.Racialbias ismeasuredby tallyingresponsestoquestions like“Minoritysuspectsare likely tobeguilty,moreoftenthannot.”Peoplewhohavehighscoresontheracialbiasscalearemorelikelytoconvictthoseofdifferentraceregardlessoftheevidence.Furthermore,thosewhoscorehighonthePJAQarealsomoreconvictionprone.Therefore,racialbiaseselevatethelikelihoodofaguiltyverdictandelicitamoreseveresentence.Thus,bymea-suringthesepre-existingracialbiasesinpotentialjurors,theeffectsofracialbiasinthecourtroomcanbereduced. Jurorsareespeciallyaffectedwhenraceisanon-salientfactorofthecase(Sommers&Ellsworth,2000).Thisfindingissurprising;whenwethinkofracialbiases,weoftenthinkofinstancesinwhichraceisasalientfactorattrial.However,theseattemptsareguidedbylater-stage,explicitprocesses.Forexample,whitejurorsarelikelytoresist(oratleast,togivetheappearanceofresisting)explicitlyracial factorswhenraceissalient(Sommers&Ellsworth,2000).Whenraceisnon-salient,however,racialbiasesarelesslikelytobeattenuated. The subtle influences of factors such as race result from automatic processes in attributions(Kahneman,2011).NobelPrizewinningpsychologistDanielKahneman(2011)hasdemonstratedthatwithrespecttoprocessesindecisionmaking,weareguidedbytwosystems:1)System1,character-izedbyrapid,effortless,andlargelyunconsciousdecision-making,and2)System2,characterizedbyeffortful,slow,anddeliberatedecision-making.Inaddition,KahnemanfoundthatmanydecisionsthatseeminglyrequirethekindofdeliberateprocessingofSystem2areinsteadaproductofunconsciousSystem1processing.Therefore,althoughdecision-makers,jurorsincluded,believetheyrelyonSystem2processes,inreality,System1processesdrivemostattributions. AsKahnemandemonstrates,System1decisionsarenotonlyrapidandeffortless,theyarealsocharacterizedbyanuncriticalacceptanceofinformation.Thatis,System1displaysnoneoftheskepti-cismthatmightbeexpectedinmoredeliberatedecision-making.Forexample,wemightbelievethatwecandiscounttheeffectsofadvertisingbyrealizingthatclaimsmadeforaproductarestatedbyad-vertisersdeliberatelytryingtoinfluencebuyingdecisions.System1processes,though,donotdiscountamessage’ssource.Thecontentofthemessageexertsitsimpactevenifwe(consciously)believethesourcetobenon-credible.Thisistheprimaryfactorbehindthelegalaphorismthat“youcan’tunringthebell.”Onceaninadmissiblestatementisuttered,instructionstodisregardarelargelyineffective(Kane,2007). TheseautomaticprocesseshavebeeninvestigatedinmockjurydeliberationsinvolvingWhiteandMiddle Easternwitnesses, victims, anddefendants (Adams, Bryden,&Griffith, 2011).Duringdeliberations,whereKahneman’sSystem2processesmightbeexpected,racialbiasesweremediatedbyjurordiscussions.WhenstereotypesofMiddleEasternterroristswereevoked(aSystem1process),however,jurybiaseswerenotmediatedbydeliberations. Notonlydoesraceinfluencejurors’decisionsintrials,italsoaffectsthelikelihoodthatanin-dividualwillfalselyconfesstoacrime.Forinstance,Najdowki(2011)suggestsstereotypethreats(animplicitprimingofnegativeattitudesaboutasocialgroupthatimpairsperformanceofamemberofthethatsocialgroup)mayberesponsiblefortheelevatedfalseconfessionratesseeninblacks.Blacksuspectsexperienceanxietyandcognitiveloadduringinterrogation,producingmanyofthecharacter-isticsthatinterrogatorsconsidersignsofguilt.Thisincreasespressureonthesuspects,increasingthechancethattheywillconfessjusttoterminatetheinterrogation(seealsoKassin,2005).

T H E J U R Y E X P E R T

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 4

Priming of Implicit Racial Biases through Religious Prejudice

Muchresearchonjurydecision-makinghasfocusedonthedirectinfluenceofracialbiasonju-rors’decisions,butenvironmentalcueslikelyheightenthosebiases.Todate,theseenvironmentalinflu-encesinthecourtroomhavebeenlargelyignored.However,ourrecentresearch(Johnsonetal.,2010)demonstratesthatenvironmentalcuesrelevanttothecourtroom,namelyreligiouscues,increaseracialbiasestowardAfrican-Americans.Thesereligiouscuescouldbeactivatingracialbiasinthecourtroom,whichinturnaffectsjurors’decision-making. Inthesocialpsychologicalliterature,primingrefersto“thetemporaryactivationofanindividu-al’smentalrepresentationbytheenvironmentandtheeffectofthisactivationonvariouspsychologicalphenomena”(Bargh,2007,p.256).Thus,primingreferstotheunconsciousinfluenceofindividuals’environmentalcuesontheirbehaviors.Pastresearchhasdemonstratedpriminginfluencesamultitudeofbehaviorsandattitudes.Forinstance,individualsreportedmoreconservativesocialattitudesandhigherlevelsofprejudicetowardnon-Christiangroupswhenaskedabouttheseattitudesinfrontofacathedralthanwheninfrontofagovernmentalbuilding(LaBouff,Rowatt,Johnson,&Finkle,2012).Ahigherpercentageofpeoplevotedinfavorofaschoolbondwhenvotinginaschoolratherthanwhenvoting inanother location (Berger,Meredith,&Wheeler,2008),and individualsvoting inchurchesweremorelikelytosupportaconservativecandidateandabanonsame-sexmarriagethanthosevot-inginneutral locations(Rutchick,2010).Eventheweightofadocumentorhardnessofachaircaninfluenceindividuals’socialperceptionsasheavierobjectshavebeenshowntoincreasetheperceivedimportanceofjobcandidatesandhardobjectshaveincreasedtherigiditywithwhichindividualsne-gotiate(Ackerman,Nocera,&Bargh,2010).Inshort,subtleenvironmentalcueshavebeenshowntoaf-fectavarietyofperceptions,attitudes,andbehaviors.Thus,subtlecontextprimescouldalsoinfluencejurors’moods,perceptionsofadefendant,orevaluativepositionsonacase.Inthecourtroom,oneoftheseenvironmentalcuescouldbereligiousobjectssuchastheBible. Inourresearch,we(Johnsonetal.,2010)foundprimingindividualswithreligiouswordsin-creasedbothsubtleandovertracialprejudicetowardAfrican-Americans.Inthefirststudy,individualsweresubliminallyprimedwitheitherreligiouswords(e.g.,Jesus,Bible,prayer)orneutralwords(e.g.,shirt,butter,switch).Thiswasdonebyhavingindividualscompleteawordgametaskinwhichtheyhadtodecideifastringofletterswasawordoranon-word.Priortoseeingthisstringofletters,however,individualswereflashedareligious(orneutral)wordfor35ms,quickenoughtobebelowtheirconsciouslevelofawarenessbutstillenoughtimeto influencetheirattitudes.Thisexposuretothewordwasalsoprecededand followedbyavisualmask (i.e.,XXXX) toprevent thewordfromremaininginindividuals’visualfields.Afterbeingprimed,individualswereaskedaseriesofquestionsthatassessedthedegreetowhich theyhadsubtleprejudice towardAfrican-Americans (e.g.,agreeingthatweshouldlimittheamountofwelfaregiventoAfrican-AmericansandthatWhitesaremoreintelligentthanAfrican-Amer-

Figure 1. Priming with Christian-relat-ed words increases subtle racism (John-son et al., 2010, Experiment 1).

T H E J U R Y E X P E R T

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 5

icans). IndividualswhowereexposedtoreligiousconceptsreportedmorenegativesubtleattitudestowardAfrican-Americans than thosewhowere exposed to neutral concepts (see Figure 1). Thus,exposuretoreligiousconceptsincreasedsubtleracialprejudicetowardAfrican-Americans. Next,wewantedtoseeiftheseeffectsextendedtoamoreovertmeasureofracialprejudicetowardAfricanAmericans,namelygeneralnegativeaffect (Cottrell&Neuberg,2005).Generalnegativeaffect isthedegreetowhichindividualsagreewithstatementslike“Hownega-tivedoyoufeeltowardsAfrican-Americans,asagroup?”and“HowmuchdoyoudislikeAfrican-Americans,asagroup?” In thesecondstudy,weprimedindividualswitheitherreligiousorneutralwordsaswedidinthefirststudy,butwethenmeasuredtheirgeneralnegativeaffecttowardAfrican-Americans.WefoundthatindividualswhowereexposedtoreligiousconceptsreportedmoregeneralnegativeaffecttowardAfrican-Americans than thosewhowereexposed toneutralconcepts(seeFigure2).Thus,exposuretoreligiousconceptsalsoin-creasesovertmeasuresofracialprejudice. hesefindingsarerelevanttothejury-decisionmakingliteraturebecausereligiouscuesareoftenpresentinthecourtroom.Forinstance,somecourtsstilluseaBibleonwhichtoaffirmtotellthetruth.WhilenocourtmakesyouswearonaBible,eventhepresenceofaBibleincourtcanunconsciouslyinfluencejurors’decisions.Ifacaseexistsinwhichthepersonontrialisobviouslyinnocentorguilty,thenthesesubtlecuesmaynotinfluencejurors’decisions.However,incaseswhicharelessclearthesesubtlecontextualreligiousprimesmightincreasejurors’racialbiasandinturn,theirresultingdeci-sionsonthecase.

Conclusion

Americansocietyhasmadeconsiderableprogressintermsofracialrelationsinthepasthalf-century.At the same time, racialbiasesand stereotypesundoubtedly remain.Moreovert formsofracialbiases—strikingmembersofajurysimplybecauseoftheirrace,forexample—areconsiderablylesscommonthantheyoncewere.Moresubtleformsofracialbiases,though,stillexist.Religiouscuesinthecourtroom,eitherseenorspoken,cansubtlyimplicitlyprimeracialprejudiceandinfluenceju-rorverdicts.Thesesubtleinfluencesarelikelytoelicittheireffectsoutsidetherealmofconsciousness.Unfortunately,asKahnemanandothershaveshown,identifyingbiasesisnotthesameaseliminatingthem.

Figure 2. Priming with Christian-re-lated words increases general negative affect toward African-Americans (John-son et al., 2010, Experiment 2).

T H E J U R Y E X P E R T

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 6

References

Ackerman, J.A.,Nocera,C.C.,&Bargh, J.A. (2010). Incidentalhaptic sensations influencesocialjudgmentsanddecision.Science, 328,1712-1715.

Adams,L.T.,Bryden,M.W.,&Griffith,J.D.(2011).MiddleEasternracialbiasandtheim-pactofjurydeliberation.American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 29,41-59.

Bargh,J.A.(2007).Social psychology and the unconscious: The automaticity of higher mental pro-cesses.NewYork:PsychologyPress.

Berger,J.,Meredith,M.,&Wheeler,S.C.(2008).Doeswhereyouvoteaffecthowyouvote?Theimpactofenvironmentalcuesonvotingbehavior.Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 105,8846-8849.

Correll,J.,Park,B.,Judd,C.M.,&Wittenbrink,B.(2002).Thepoliceofficer’sdilemma:Us-ingethnicitytodisambiguatepotentiallythreateningindividuals.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83,1314-1329.

Cottrell,C.A.,&Neuberg,S.L.(2005).Differentemotionalreactionstodifferentgroups:Asociofunctionalthreat-basedapproachto“prejudice.”Journal of Personality and Social Psy-chology, 88,770-789.

Devenport,J.L.,Stedbaker,C.A.,&Penrod,S.D.(1999).Perspectivesonjurydecision-mak-ing:Caseswithpretrialpublicityandcasesbasedoneyewitnessidentifications.InDurso,F.T.(Ed.),Handbook of Applied Cognition.Chichester:JohnWileyandsons.

Hastie,R.,Penrod,S.D.,&Pennington,N.(1983).Inside the jury.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.

Johnson,M.K.,Rowatt,W.C.,&LaBouff, J. (2010).PrimingChristian religious conceptsincreases racialprejudice.Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1 (2), 119-126.doi:10.1177/1948550609357246

Kahneman,D.(2011).Thinking, fast and slow. NewYork:Farrar,StrausandGiroux.

Kane,J.L.(2007).Judgingcredibility.Litigation, 33(3),1-7.

Kassin,S.L.(2005).Onthepsychologyofconfessions:Doesinnocenceputinnocentsatrisk?American Psychologist, 60,215-228.

LaBouff,J.,Rowatt,W.C.,Johnson,M.K.,&Finkle,C.(2012).Differencesinattitudestowardsoutgroupsinareligiousornon-religiouscontextinamulti-nationalsample:Asituation-al contextpriming study. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 22, 1-9.doi:10.1080/10508619.2012.634778

T H E J U R Y E X P E R T

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 7

Lecci,L.B.,&Myers,B.(2008).Individualdifferenceinattitudesrelevanttojurordecisionmaking:DevelopmentandvalidationofthePretrialJurorAttitudeQuestionnaire(PJAQ).Journal of Applied Psychology, 38, 2010-2038.doi:10.1007/BF01044839

MacLin,O.H.,MacLin,K.M.,&Malpass,R.S.(2001).Race,arousal,attention,exposure,anddelay.Psychology Public Policy, and Law, 7(1),134-152.doi:10.1037//1076-8971.7.1.134

Najdowski,C. J. (2011). Stereotype threat in criminal interrogations:Why innocentBlacksuspectsareatriskforconfessingfalsely.Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 17, 562-591. doi:10.1037/a0023741

Pennington,N.,&Hastie,R.(1986).Evidenceevaluationincomplexdecisionmaking.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51,242-258.

Roberts,A. (2012). (Re)Formingthe jury:Detectionanddisinfectionof implicit jurorbias.Connecticut Law Review, 44,11-70.

Rutchick,A.M.(2010).Deusexmachina:Theinfluenceofpollingplaceonvotingbehavior.Political Psychology, 31(2),209-225.

Sommers,S.R.,&Ellsworth,P.C.(2000).Raceinthecourtroom:Perceptionsofguiltanddispositional attributions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1367-1379. doi:10.1177/0146167200263005

Sommers,S.R.,&Ellsworth,P.C. (2001).White jurorbias:An investigationofprejudiceagainstBlackdefendantintheAmericancourtroom.Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 7 (1),201-229.doi:10.1037///1076-8971.7.1.201

Vohs,K.D.,&Luce,M.F.(2010).Judgmentanddecisionmaking.InR.F.Baumeister&E.J.Finkel(Eds.),Advanced social psychology(pp.733-757).Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

We asked two experienced trial consultants to comment on this article as it relates to litigation advocacy. On the following pages, Karen Hurwitz and George Kich offer their perspectives.

T H E J U R Y E X P E R T

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 8

Race, Religion and the “B” Word

resPonse By Karen hurWitzKaren Hurwitz, JD, LCSW is a trial and jury consultant based in Houston, Texas. She works on both civil and criminal cases nationwide.

Thisarticlewasdifficultformetoreadandpainfultoconsider.Itsoundedalarmbellsinsideofmethatwon’tstopringing.The“B”wordisbias.I’vewantedtobelievethingswerebetterintermsofthe“us-versus-them”mentalityinthiscountryandthatinsidethecourtroomweweredoingadecentjobofuncoveringbiasandprejudice.Thisarticle,especiallywiththebackdropoftheTrayvonMartintragedyhighlightshowmuchworkthereistobedone. Wearebiased.Weviewtheworldthroughthelensofourlifeexperiences,ourvaluesandourbe-liefs.Andourindividuallifeexperiences,valuesandbeliefsareverydifferent.Tothinkthatbiasinsidethecourtroomisanylessthanbiasoutsidethecourtroommakesnosense.Andtothinkthataquestionsuchas:“IsthereanythingaboutthefactthatmyclientisAfrican-Americanthatmightcauseyoutobebiasedinthiscase?”isgoingtouncoverracialbiasisnaive. Thelawsaysthatjurorswhohavebiasorprejudiceaboutourcasecannotserve.Wecannotmakeadeterminationonjurorbiasesifwedancearoundthesubjectoraddressit inasuperficialmanner.Thereiswaytoomuchatstake,especiallyincriminalcaseswherelifeandlibertyareontheline. Thehardquestionsmustalwaysbedealtwithinjuryselectionandthehardquestionsinjuryselectionareequallyhardoutsideofthecourtroom.Wedon’twanttotalkaboutsubjectsthatmakeusuncomfortable,anywhere.Racialbias,whetherincreasedbyreligiousprimingornotisgenerallyoneofthosesubjects.ItbringstomindthelyricsofanoldPamalaStanleysong:“I,Idon’t,Idon’twanttotalkaboutit.” Wetypicallydon’tconfrontourbiasesuntilsomethingorsomeoneforcesustodoso.Asthere-searchauthorspointout,awarenessdoesnotequatetochange,butitisaprerequisite.Withawareness,wehavetheabilitytomonitorourbehaviorandrecognizewhenwereverttowayswedonotlike.Atthatpoint,wehavetheopportunitytoactdifferently. Asacountry,weneedmoreconversationsaboutbiasandprejudice:conversationsinwhichweexploreourownattitudesandbeliefs.Notwithfearofrepercussions,buttoincreaseawarenessandun-derstandingofourselvesandothers.Injuryselection,wehaveboththeopportunityandtheobligationtohavesuchaconversation. Notonlydoweneedtohelpjurorsuncovertheirownbiases,wealsoneedtodrivehomeacriti-calpointthrougheducation:yourclientisnotastatistic;yourclientisnotagroup.Yourclientisanindividual.Yourclientrepresentsnoonebuthimorherself.WhenanAfricanAmericanisontrial,allAfricanAmericansarenotontrial.WhenaMuslimisontrial,religionisnotontrial.Statisticsarenotontrial.Statisticsmaybeinterestinginanacademicarticleorhelpfulinsettingpolicy,butstatisticsareirrelevanttowhatyourclientdidordidnotdo. Jurorsheartheinstructionthattheyareonlytoconsidertheevidencepresented;thattheyarenottoletbiasorprejudiceinfluencetheirdecision.Butifjurorsareunconsciousoftheirbiases,thenhow

T H E J U R Y E X P E R T

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 9

aretheygoingtopreventthemfrominfluencingtheirdecisions?Withoutafullerdiscussiononbiasandprejudicetheinstructionislikelytogoinoneearandouttheother. In juryselectionyouwanttocreateempathyforyourclientwithregardtothebiasheorshemayface.Theempathymaycomewhenpotentialjurorscanidentifywithyourclientbecausetheyorsomeoneclosetothemhavebeenjudgedbyastereotype.Fromthereyouwanttodiscussstereotypesgenerally,andultimatelythepotentialbiasinyourcase.Theexpectationisthataftersuchadiscussion,notonlywillpanelmembersrecognizetheirsharedexperienceinbeingjudgedbyastereotype,manywillseethattheyapplyadoublestandardwhenjudgingothersbaseduponastereotype. Asistruewithmostresearch,thisresearchraisesmorequestions.Cananyonereallygetafairtrial?Howcanweknowtowhatextentanyverdicthasbeenaffectedbybias?WhywouldreligiouscuesincreaseracialbiastowardAfricanAmericansandhowwouldtheycomeintotrial?Whomadeupthesampleintheauthors’research?IstheincreasedbiasfoundintheirstudyonlytowardAfricanAmeri-cans?Theanswertothelatterquestionis“no.”Thesamegroupofresearchershasfoundinsubsequentresearchthatreligiousprimingincreasesbiasagainstgays,Muslimsandatheists(Johnson,Rowatt,&LaBouff,inpress). ThesampleinthecurrentresearchwasundergraduateintroductorypsychologystudentsatBay-lorUniversity inWaco,Texas.Megan Johnson, leadauthorandoneof the researchers toldme inaphoneconversationthatthestudentsintheBaylorstudywerepredominantlyChristianandpoliticallyconservativeandthatthereligiouscueswereChristian.Theirsamplewas50.7%White,17.8%Asians,17.8%Hispanic,and13.7%African-American.Theincreaseinracialbiaswasfoundwithinallgroupsinthestudy,includingAfricanAmericanstowardotherAfricanAmericans. Sohowmightreligioncomeintotrial?Isitrelevant?Religionoftenarisesincriminalcaseswhentalkingaboutthedefendant.ItisimportanttomanyjurorsthatthedefendantbelievesinGodorattendschurchregularly.Couldthiscausethejurorstojudgelessharshly?Perhaps. Whattypesofreligiousargumentswouldcauseajurortofeelincreasedbiasagainstsomeone?Wouldanattorneyintentionallyintroducereligionorreligiouscuestoincreaseracialbiasorreligiousbias?Onerecentpatentcase(CommilUSA,LLCv.CiscoSystems,Inc.)speakstothis.Inthatcase,uponthePlaintiffsrequest,thecourtgrantedanewtrialforpartofthecase,includingdamagesafterfindingthatthedefenseattorneymadeirrelevantandprejudicialreligiouscommentsandarguments.Thecom-mentsweremadewhenoneofCommil’sowners,whoisJewish,tookthestandandtheargumentscameinclosing.Thecourtconcludedthattheattorneycreatedan“usv.them”mentalitythathadatendencytoappealtotheprejudicesofthejurorsandultimatelyprejudicedthejury’sfindings.Thejuryawardedplaintiff$3.7millioninthefirsttrial,whichwasmuchlowerthanexpected.Onappeal,withthereli-giousargumentsgone,theyawarded$63.8million,anawardinlinewiththePlaintiff’sdamages. Asforreligiouscuesinthecourtroom,theonethatcomestomindistheBible.IamunawaretowhatextenttheBibleisstillusedforswearinginwitnesses.Certainlysomecourtsnolongerusethemorthewords“sohelpmeGod.”Theresearchwouldsuggestthatalawyershouldconsideraskingthatanyobviousreligiouscuesberemovedfromthecourtroom,citingthisresearch.Youmaylose,butitseemsworththetry. TheauthorsreferencethePretrialJurorAttitudeQuestionnairebyLecciandMyers(2008)asonewaytomeasureracialattitudesofpotentialjurors.Iamnotfamiliarwiththisscaleandhavenotworkedonacaseinwhichthistypeofscalehasbeenused.IcommunicatedwithLenLecciregardingthescaleanditsuseincourt.Whileheisnotawareofanylawyerswhohaveusedtheirscaleincourt,hesaidthat

T H E J U R Y E X P E R T

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 10

itispossiblethathasoccurred.WhileIimaginethisscaleandotherscouldbehelpful,Iwonderhowthecourtswouldusethem.Wouldajurorwhoshowedahighdegreeofracialbiasonascaleautomaticallybeexcluded?Or,woulditbethebasisforadiscussionbeforethejudge?Or,simplyadditionalinforma-tiontoconsiderwithotherinformationgatheredinjuryselection? Belowisalistofvoirdirequestionsonracialbiastoconsiderinacriminalcaseinwhichyourcli-entisanAfricanAmerican.IchosetoaddressracialbiastowardsAfricanAmericansbecausethatwasthebiasstudiedintheauthors’originalresearch.Mygoalistoshowhowyoucoulddevelopathought-fulconversationonracialbias,nottosuggestthatthesequestionsmustbeused.Somequestionscouldbeincludedinajuryquestionnairewithashorterdiscussionduringvoirdire,butIbelievethediscus-sionismostimportant. Bythoughtfullyconsideringthesetypesofquestions,manyjurorswillthinkaboutthingstheyhaveneverthoughtaboutbefore.Theymaybegintolookatthemselvesandconsidertheirownbiasesforthefirsttimeintheirlives.Youmay,too.Thisisahugestep.HUGE.Honorit.Respectit.Recognizehowdifficultitistolookatyourownstuff.Andthinkabouthowitmightaffectthefeelingsandat-titudesofsomeoneonajurypanelstaringatyourclient.Myhopeisthatitwillhelpachieveagreaterdegreeofjusticeinourcourts.

Possible questions on racial bias:

Howmanyofyouorsomeoneclosetoyouhavefeltnegativelyjudged,stigmatized,seenasinferiorortreatedpoorlybasedonastereotype,alabeloraprejudicedattituderegardingsomeaspectofyourlife?Maybeyouareawomanwithblondhairandhavebeenstereotypedas“adumbblond”basedonnoinformationaboutyoubutyourhaircolor;maybeyou’vestruggledwithweightandfeelyou’vebeentreatedpoorlybecauseofyourweight;maybeyouareJewishandhavebeensubjectedtoreligiousslurswhennothingelsewasknownaboutyou;maybeyouareMuslimandsince9/11/2001feelpeopleareafraidofyouandseeyouasthreateninganddangerous;maybeyouareHispanicandfindpeopleassumingyoudroppedoutofhighschoolwheninfactyouwereatthetopofyourgraduatingclass;maybeyouareAfricanAmericanandhavebeenstoppedbythepolicefornoapparentreasonotherthanyouaredark-skinned;maybeyourspouseorpartnerhasbeenstigmatizedbecauseheorshesuffersfromdepression;maybeyourchildhasbeenbulliedbecauseheissmallerthantheotherchildrenhisageorbecausesheissmarterorhasalearningdisability;maybeyouaregayandyou’vebeenphysicallyattackedsimplybecauseyouaregay.Itcouldbeoneofanendlesslistofnegativestereotypesorjudg-mentsthatpeoplehavecreatedovertheyears.Pleasesharewithme,ifyoucanyourexperiencesofbeingnegativelyjudgedinthisway.

Whatdoesitfeelliketobenegativelyjudgedbysomeonewhoknowsnothingaboutwhoyouareinside?

Howhavethesenegativejudgmentsaffectedyourlifeoryourfamily’slife?

Howhaveyoulearnedtocopewiththestereotypesandjudgmentsmadeaboutyou?

Howdoyouthinkpeoplecometofeelnegativelytowardanentiregroup?

T H E J U R Y E X P E R T

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 11

Doyouthinkpeopleareawareofthepainanddamagetheycancausewhentheylabelsome-onewhotheydonotevenknow?

Ifsomeonehasanegativeopinionofanentiregroup,doyouthinkitispossibleforthemtochangethatnegativeopinion?

Whataresomeofthewaysyoucanimaginethatapersonmightcometoseethattheyareunfairlyjudginganentiregroupandtheseriousconsequencesoftheirjudgments?

Asyoucansee,myclient,Mr.Jones(fictitiousname)isAfricanAmerican.We’vebeentalkingaboutstereotypesgenerally.IwanttocontinueourdiscussionandshiftnowtostereotypesaboutAfricanAmericans.IknowsomeofyoumayfeeluncomfortablehavingthisdiscussionwithMr.JonesandotherAfricanAmericanssittingamongus.LetmereassureyouthatMr.Joneswel-comesthediscussion;youwillnotsayanythinghehasnotheardbeforeandIfeelquitecertainthesameistruefortheotherAfricanAmericansintheroom.

Ashardadiscussionasitmaybeitisnecessary.Youknowwhy.IfyouareselectedtobeajurorinthiscaseyouwillbemakingajudgmentaboutMr.Jones’innocenceorguilt.Hisfreedomisatstake.Thejudgewilltellyoubeforeyoustartdeliberationsthatyoumustbaseyourdeci-sionontheevidenceinthecaseandthatyoumaynotletbiasorprejudiceaffectyourjudgment.YouseewhereIamgoinghere.IfanyofyouhavenegativeopinionsofAfricanAmericansasarace;ifyouareafraidofAfricanAmericans;orifyou’vehadnegativeexperienceswithAfricanAmericans,thenthosenegativefeelingsorfearsaregoingtogowithyouintothetrial.IfyouareafraidofAfricanAmericans,thenyouwouldinalllikelihoodbeafraidofMr.Jonesorseehimassomeonewhoisdangerous.Youwouldfeelthatwayalreadyandyouarenotajuroryet.

Ifyouareoneofthemanypeoplewhohadthecouragetosharewithmehowyouhavebeenwrongfullyjudgedandyouwereontrial,Ifeelcertainyouwouldwanttoknowwhoonthejurypanelhadnegativefeelingsaboutyousimplybecauseyouwereamemberofthatgroup.Youwouldwantjurorswholookatyouandhaveeitheraneutralorapositiveopinionaboutyouforwhateverreason,butyouwouldnotwantsomeonewhostartedoffthinkingpoorlyofpeoplewhoarelikeyou.

Soletmestartwiththis,howmanycanrecallgrowinguphearingaparent,grandparentorotherrelativeuseawordforAfricanAmericansthatyouthoughtwasugly?DoyouthinkyourrelativeshadanegativeattitudetowardAfricanAmericansordoyouthinkitwassimplysome-thingtheyheardtheirownparentssay?DoyoufeelthatyouhavecometothinkaboutAfricanAmericansthesamewayyourrelativesdidorwouldyousaythatyouhaveadifferentattitude?

DoyouthinkthatracialdiscriminationagainstAfricanAmericansstillexistsinourcountry?Ifyes,doyouthinkthereislessdiscriminationthanthereusedtobeordoyouthinkitjustshowsupindifferentways?ThosethatthinkracialdiscriminationagainstAfricanAmericansislargelyathingofthepast,canyouthinkofaturningpointinourcountrywhenthingschanged?

DoesitsurpriseyouthatthecountryissosplitabouttheZimmermancaseinFlorida?Whatdoyouthinkexplainstheintensity?

T H E J U R Y E X P E R T

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 12

IfbiasandprejudiceexisttowardsAfricanAmericansoutsidethecourtroomthenitseemsitmustexistinthecourtroom,too.Wouldyouagree?

TotheextentyoufeelthatdiscriminationtowardsAfricanAmericansisstillabigproblem,howdowereduceit?Isitpossible?

HowmanyofyouarecurrentlyorhaveinthepastbeenmarriedtoorinarelationshipwithanAfricanAmerican?Ifyouareinamixedrelationship,whatisthatlikeforyouintermsofpub-licreactions?HowmanyofyouapproveofwhitesmarryingAfricanAmericans?Howmanydonot?Forthosethatdonot,canyousharewithmehowyouhavecometofeelthisway?

I’msuresomeofyouhaveheardpeoplesaythattheyaremoreafraidofAfricanAmericans.Forwhateverreason,ifanAfricanAmericanmanwalkstowardthemonthestreet,theyaremoreafraidthanifawhitemanwalkstowardthem.Cananyonesharewhereyouthinktheincreasedfearcomesfrom?Doyouthinkitisbaseduponstatisticsordoyouthinkithastodowithsome-thingelse?

HowmanyofyouhavehiredAfricanAmericans,eitheratyourhomeoratyouroffice?Werethoseexperiencesgenerallypositiveornegativeforyou?

HowmanyofyouhavehadorcurrentlyhavecloserelationshipswithAfricanAmericans?

IfsomeonedoesnotlikeAfricanAmericansdoyouthinktheycouldfairlyjudgeanAfricanAmericanaccusedofacrime?

IfsomeonebelievesthatAfricanAmericansaremoredangerousthanothersdoyouthinktheycouldfairlyjudgeanAfricanAmericanaccusedofacrime?

Ifyoufeelthatitisimportantforpeopletosayiftheyhavenegativeopinionsorfeelingsto-wardAfricanAmericansbeforetheyareallowedtoserveonajuryinacaseinwhichanAfricanAmericanisontrial,howdowegetpeopletoadmitthosefeelings?

Myconcernladiesandgentlemenissimple.Ibelievethatifyouhaveanegativefeelingto-wardAfricanAmericansasagroupforanyreason,ifyouthinktheyareoflessvaluethanothers,ifyouthinktheyaremoredangerous,ifyouthinktheyarelessintelligentoranyotherfeelingorfearthatyouhave,thenyoumayverywelljudgeMr.Jonesmorenegativelyorharshlythanyouwouldifyoudidnothavethosefeelings.IfearthatifyouhavethosenegativethoughtstowardAfricanAmericansthatyouwillnotbeabletoseeMr.Jonesasapersonbutwillseehimsimplyasapartofagroupthatyoudonotlike,valueorfeelcomfortablewith.

Mr.Jonesisnotagroup.Heisoneperson.StatisticsmayshowthatAfricanAmericansarechargedandconvictedofcrimesmorethanwhites.Theyarealsomorefrequentlywrongfullyconvictedthanwhites.WhatdothosestatisticstellusaboutMr.Jonesintermsofhisinnocenceorguilt?Nothing,correct?Whyisthat?Right,becauseMr.Jonesisoneperson.He’shimself.JustasyouandIareoneperson.Neitherhenoranyofuscanrepresentanentireraceorreligionorethnicgroup.It’simpossible.Mr.Jonesisnotastatisticinthiscase.Heisahumanbeingwhowasarrestedandchargedwithcommittingacrimethatheclaimshedidnotcommit.Heisnot

T H E J U R Y E X P E R T

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 13

anentirerace.Hedoesnotrepresentanentirerace.Nostereotypeappliestoeveryoneinagroup.We’vealreadydiscussedthat.Andthejuryselectedwillbejudginghimsolelyupontheevi-dencethatyouhearattrial.NotbaseduponarticlesyouhavereadinthenewspaperorshowsyouhavewatchedonTV.NoneofthathasanythingtodowiththiscaseorwithMr.Jones.

SothisismylastquestionforyouandthelasttimeIwillgettospeakwithyouasagroup.YoumustbehonestwithmebecausethelawrequiresitandMr.Jonesdeservesit.AndyoucanrestassuredI’mnotgoingtoaskyouinfrontofallthesepeoplewhyyouareraisingyourhand.So,pleaseraiseyourhandifthereisanyreasonwhatsoever,anyreasonthatyoufeelyoushouldnotbeajurorinthiscase;itmayhavesomethingtodowiththisdiscussionoritmaybeaboutsomethingwehaven’tevendiscussed.Whateveritis,inyourheartofhearts,youfeelthisisnotthecaseforyou.

Thankyouforparticipatinginthisdiscussionandforyourhonesty.

Theattorney’sabilitytoengagejurorsinthistypeofdiscussiondependsonmanyfactors.Mostimportantly,thejudgemustbelieveinitsimportanceandgiveyouthetime.Regardlessofthenumberofperemptorystrikesthatresult,Ibelievethereismuchtobegainedfromthisconversation.Oncejurorsseetheirownbiasesanddoublestandardsthereisagreaterchancetheywill,atleastforthedurationoftrial,monitorthemselvesalongthoselines. Thehopeisthatthistypeofconversationinvoirdirewillleadtoamorethoughtfulandrespect-fulconversationindeliberations.Andthat’sthemostwecanaskforfromjurors--athoughtfulrationalconversationaboutreality;notaboutwhattheywanttothinkorwhattheyassumeoccurs,butbasedonreality;therealitythattheyhavebiasesandprejudicesandtherealitythatiftheyarenotcarefulintheirdeliberations,andiftheydonotpolicetheirbiasesandprejudicestheycancompletelymisjudgesomeone,worse,wrongfullyconvictsomeoneandworstofallcausesomeonetolosetheirlife. Idon’tbelieveit’spossibletoeliminateallbias,butIdobelieveamoredirectandthoroughdis-cussionwilleliminatemore.Weneedtodobetterineliminatingbiasinthecourtroom.Andweneedtostartnow.

References

Johnson,M.K.,Rowatt,W.C.,&LaBouff,J.(inpress).Religionandprejudicerevisited:In-groupfavoritism,out-groupderogation,orboth?Psychology of Religion and Spirituality.

MemorandumOpinionandOrder,CommilUSA,LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., No.2:07-cv-341(E.D.Tex.Dec.29,2010).

T H E J U R Y E X P E R T

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 14

How Does Religion Play a Role in Biasing Juror Deliberations?

resPonse By george Kitahara KiCh

George Kitahara Kich, PhD, trial and litigation consultant in cases all across the country is founder and principal of George Kich Consulting. He has presented at law associations, universities and con-ferences on jury analysis, voir dire, juror decision-making and witness preparation.

Prejudices,biasesandstereotypesarecognitivepsychosocialprocessesthatoperatewithineachofusandaffectourrelationshipsinbothobviousandsubtleways.Manypeopleworkhardatmak-ingunconsciousprocessesintoconscious,interpersonallyadaptiveandmutually-enhancingbehaviorsanddecisions.Atthesametime,racial,gender,classandprivilegebiases,subtleandovert,areverymuchapartofoureverydaylivesandourworkinthecourts.Wedojuryresearch,runquestionnairesandpromptdirectvoirdirequestioningaswaystogetatjurors’biases.However,therecentresearchon“priming”and implicitbiases thatoperateautomaticallyandoutofourawarenesshasaddedacomplicatingspintooureffortsatidentifying,exposingorchallengingjurorswhoholdunwaveringbiases. Thevery interestingpaperbyMalavanti, Johnson,RowattandWeaverhighlight in their re-search that subtleuseofwords, imagesor objects thathave religiousmeaning appears toheightenjurors’negativereactionstoAfricanAmericans.Thisisanamazingresult,andbringsupmanyques-tionsforme:IsthisreligiousinformationmoreexclusivelyUnitedStatesChristian?What,ifany,ef-fectsresultfromusingnon-Christianreligiousinformation?Isthereanydifferenceinresponseifmoreinclusiveoracceptingreligiousconceptsorwordsareused?Doesitmatterifthepersonisanatheist,orhowreligiousorreligiously-identifiedthepersonis?WhatistheeffectofajurorbringingaBibletodeliberation,andaskingtheotherjurorstojoinhiminaprayermeetingtohelpthemcometotherightandjustdecision? Their research alsomademe curious aboutwhypriming about religionmight induce theseresponsesaboutrace.DoesreligiousprimingintroduceanauthoritarianandexclusionaryframeasLa-koffdiscussesinhiswritingsabouttraditionalmoralvaluesandStrictFatherMorals?ArethreatsandsafetyrulesneurologicallyactivatedagainststereotypesofthreateningaggressorsasBallandothershavedescribed?IrecentlyreadRapaille’sfascinatingdescriptionsofthesubtle,underlying“culturecodes”thatmanufacturershighlightasawaytoinduceustowantvariousproducts.Whatculturalmindsetsarebeingactivatedbyreligiouspriming?FurtherresearchmayuncovertheseprocessesandIlookforwardtohearingmoreabouttheirongoingworkinthisarea. Inthemeantime,theNCSC(NationalCenterforStateCourts)hasdoneinterestingandexten-siveworkonacknowledgingandcombattingimplicitbiasnotonlyinjuryselectionanddeliberations,butalsoamongjudgesandintheorganizationandstructureofthecourts,withacampaigncalled“Ra-cial and Ethnic Fairness”.Manyoftheirreportsandarticlesprovidewaysofmakingtheimplicitmoreconscious,slowingdownthecognitiveandemotional loadoftheinformationbeingpresented,andmakingspaceforthe“higheffortprocessing”thatrace-salientinformationrequires.Wealsoknowthat

T H E J U R Y E X P E R T

May 2012 © American Society of Trial Consultants 2012 15

thenarrativestructureofthestoryofthecase,presentedduringvoirdire,aswellasthroughoutthetrial,canexposeimplicitbiasestothemoreconsciousanddeliberativemindsofjurors.ThisisinlinewithSommers’researchthatsaysthatmakingrace(andpossiblybyextensiontheinfluenceofreligiousbeliefs?)intoanexplicit,salientandimportantcomponentofthetrialcanmitigatethesubconsciouseffectsofactualbias.Whenjurorsareputonnoticeandprimedtowardconsciousdeliberationofraceinsteadofallowedtohaveanunconsciouscolorblindmindset,theycanfocusmoreovertlyonthefactsandthelaw.

References

Ball,D.&Keenan,D.(2009).Reptile.BalloonPress,NY.

Kang,J.(2009).Implicit bias: A primer for courts. Williamsburg,VA:NationalCenterforStateCourts.(availableatNCSC:http://www.ncsconline.org/D_Research/ref/implicit.html)

Lakoff,G.(2002).Moralpolitics:Howliberalsandconservativesthink.UniversityofChi-cagoPress,Chicago.

Marsh,S.(2009).Thelensofimplicitbias.Juvenile and Family Justice Today, 18,16-19.(avail-ableatNCSC:http://www.ncsconline.org/D_Research/ref/implicit.html)

NationalCampaigntoEnsuretheRacialandEthnicFairnessofAmerica’sStateCourts:Na-tionalCenterforStateCourts:ProjectReportsforPhase2:ImplicitBias:

http://www.ncsconline.org/D_Research/ref/implicit.html

Rapaille,C.(2007)Theculturecode.BroadwayBooks,NY.

Sommers,S.R.,&Ellsworth,P.C.(2000).Raceinthecourtroom:Perceptionsofguiltanddis-positionalattributions.Personality&SocialPsychologyBulletin,26,1367-1379(presented in another version in The Jury Expert:“WhatWeDo(andDon’t)KnowaboutRaceandJu-rors”,TheJuryExpert,2010,22(4),1-12).