Diversity improves deliberations partly by making White jurors work harder

Evidence

In one study, participants interacted online with confederates (who provided predetermined responses from the researchers). The researchers manipulated the race of those confederates. Participants who believed they were in diverse juries deliberated in a fundamentally different manner than did those who believed they were deliberating in homogenous juries (Stevenson, Lytle, Baumholser, & McCracken, 2017). Stevenson et al. (2017) predicted that White jurors deliberating in diverse juries would experience anxieties typical of interracial interactions (e.g., Plant & Devine, 2003; Richeson & Shelton, 2003; Trawalter, et al., 2009). Based on theories of regulating one’s responses to reduce prejudice (e.g., Fleming et al., 2005; Monteith, 1993), the authors predicted that deliberating in diverse juries would induce more self-focus and more self-regulatory behavior. Jurors deliberating in diverse juries used more terms indicating that they were selfregulating than did those deliberating in nondiverse juries (Stevenson et al., 2017). The results, however, suggested a different overall impact of diversity on jury deliberations. Participants, although they were more likely to think carefully when developing their responses, communicated less in diverse as opposed to nondiverse juries. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 906 (#expands, via linked claim)

A comprehensive meta-analysis which coded for participant race in order to detect the presence of out-group bias reported a significant, but small, effect of out-group bias (Mitchell, Haw, Pfeifer, & Meissner, 2005). The effects of out-group bias were largest when participants were providing continuous guilt measures and for racial bias in sentencing decisions (as opposed to verdict decisions or likelihood of guilt ratings). This meta-analysis also found that out-group bias effects were largest when Black participants were evaluating White (vs. Black) defendants. The finding that out-group bias effects were largest for Black mock jurors is consistent with the most recent meta-analysis to examine the role of out-group bias in mock juror decisions (Devine & Caughlin, 2014). This meta-analysis only found evidence of out-group bias for Black jurors making judgments about White defendants (compared to Black defendants) and White jurors evaluating Hispanic defendants (compared to White defendants; Devine & Caughlin, 2014). — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 849 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Consistent with earlier findings (Sommers, 2006; Stevenson et al., 2017), White jurors who deliberated in diverse juries experienced greater cognitive depletion than did those who deliberated in homogenous juries composed mainly of other White jurors (Peter-Hagene, 2019). Cognitive depletion, however, did not result in decreased performance among White jurors deliberating in diverse juries. In fact, although nondiverse juries discussed more case facts when the defendant was White than when the defendant was Black, diverse juries eliminated this discrepancy. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 907 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Smaller and nonunanimous juries produce less thorough deliberations and more convictions. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 875; The past century’s chief jury reform was making juries more representative — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1418; Partisan diversity on a court makes dissenting opinions more frequent — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1599 (+11 more)

Broader Connections

• Merely believing a jury is diverse makes White jurors self-regulate more and speak less #expands (0.93) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 906
• Out-group bias is strongest for minority jurors judging White defendants #complicates (0.75) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 849
• Diverse juries eliminate the tendency to evaluate Black defendants’ cases less carefully #complicates (0.74) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 907