The evolution of jury research methods: From hugo münsterberg to the modern age

Brian H. Bornstein, Amy J. Kleynhans

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

A common criticism of jury simulation research is that it usually solicits individual judgments from mock jurors in the absence of group deliberation. This Article analyzes the evolution of jury, as opposed to juror, research methods over time. Part I discusses the pros and cons of different research methods; Part II provides a historical overview of jury deliberation research; Part III analyzes recently developed techniques for conducting jury research in the computer era; and Part IV speculates about the jury research of the future. The Article's final section offers a few concluding thoughts.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)813-840
Number of pages28
JournalDenver Law Review
Volume96
Issue number4
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

research method
deliberation
criticism
simulation
Group

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law

Cite this

The evolution of jury research methods : From hugo münsterberg to the modern age. / Bornstein, Brian H.; Kleynhans, Amy J.

In: Denver Law Review, Vol. 96, No. 4, 01.01.2019, p. 813-840.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{0cde00591b0b4211a09b8472313c98d4,
title = "The evolution of jury research methods: From hugo m{\"u}nsterberg to the modern age",
abstract = "A common criticism of jury simulation research is that it usually solicits individual judgments from mock jurors in the absence of group deliberation. This Article analyzes the evolution of jury, as opposed to juror, research methods over time. Part I discusses the pros and cons of different research methods; Part II provides a historical overview of jury deliberation research; Part III analyzes recently developed techniques for conducting jury research in the computer era; and Part IV speculates about the jury research of the future. The Article's final section offers a few concluding thoughts.",
author = "Bornstein, {Brian H.} and Kleynhans, {Amy J.}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "96",
pages = "813--840",
journal = "Denver Law Review",
issn = "2469-6463",
publisher = "University of Denver Sturm College of Law",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The evolution of jury research methods

T2 - From hugo münsterberg to the modern age

AU - Bornstein, Brian H.

AU - Kleynhans, Amy J.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - A common criticism of jury simulation research is that it usually solicits individual judgments from mock jurors in the absence of group deliberation. This Article analyzes the evolution of jury, as opposed to juror, research methods over time. Part I discusses the pros and cons of different research methods; Part II provides a historical overview of jury deliberation research; Part III analyzes recently developed techniques for conducting jury research in the computer era; and Part IV speculates about the jury research of the future. The Article's final section offers a few concluding thoughts.

AB - A common criticism of jury simulation research is that it usually solicits individual judgments from mock jurors in the absence of group deliberation. This Article analyzes the evolution of jury, as opposed to juror, research methods over time. Part I discusses the pros and cons of different research methods; Part II provides a historical overview of jury deliberation research; Part III analyzes recently developed techniques for conducting jury research in the computer era; and Part IV speculates about the jury research of the future. The Article's final section offers a few concluding thoughts.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85072399619&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85072399619&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:85072399619

VL - 96

SP - 813

EP - 840

JO - Denver Law Review

JF - Denver Law Review

SN - 2469-6463

IS - 4

ER -