NCJ Number
91204
Journal
Judicature Volume: 67 Issue: 3 Dated: (September 1983) Pages: 120-133
Date Published
1983
Length
14 pages
Annotation
Contrary to previous research, this study finds women do show a greater propensity than men to prejudge defendant guilt, although explanations for this phenomenon are elusive.
Abstract
The study data were derived from telephone surveys of three independently drawn representative samples of about 12,000 members of the 1979 or 1980 Yolo County, Calif., jury rosters. For each survey, respondents were selected from those rosters by a probability sampling technique designed to give each roster member an equal chance of being included. Interview schedules were highly similar across surveys and were comprised of about 50 items, almost all of which were forced-choice. The surveys were undertaken in cooperation with the county district attorney in connection with four criminal cases where motions for changes of venue were being considered. The sample sizes for the four cases were 323, 369 (two cases), and 383. In all four cases, female respondents were found to be more likely than males to reveal partiality, as measured by belief in the defendant's guilt and by belief in one's own incapacity to serve impartially as a juror at that defendant's trial. The examination of explanations for this finding focused on the extent of specific information about the given case, general attitude toward crime and punishment issues, and educational achievement. Each of these factors has been shown in the past to be related to prejudgment, but these explanations were not conclusive in explaining the preponderance of female prejudgment in this study. Tabular data are provided.