Purpose. The objective of this review was to give a broad overview of various biasesassociated with jury decision making. Specifically we review research on the impact ofpretrial publicity, jury instructions, inadmissible evidence, and scientific evidence. Thisarticle elucidates various challenges jurors may face across systems around the worldand remedies to counter these challenges. Results. After 50 years of scientific research on juries and juror decision making,there are still many gaps in understanding how factors such as pretrial publicity,inadmissible evidence, scientific evidence, and jury instructions influence juries. At thesame time the field has developed a level of appreciation for these problems and ismaking strives toward understanding them. Conclusion. Based on this review some conclusions can be drawn regarding theareas of decision making reviewed. Jury instructions: Research shows that jurors havedifficulties in understanding pattern instructions, at the same time we have developedsome insights into ways instructions can be rewritten to increase comprehensibility.Inadmissible evidence: We are aware of the cognitive effort involved in attempting todisregard evidence but are at this point unclear on how to eliminate the associatedproblems. Scientific evidence: Research has illuminated the difficulties jurors havewith comprehending scientific evidence. Better education of jurors and judges canhelp to address this issue. Pretrial publicity: The threats posed by pretrial publicityto the defendant's right to a fair trial are clear. At the same time (save change ofvenue) there is a need to develop cost-effective remedies to help overcome media-induced biases.
展开▼
