Year: 2013
Type: article
Abstract: Courts have extremely limited opportunities to educate jurors about the pernicious effects of complex psychological phenomena like implicit bias and how these implicit forms of bias may distort jurors' interpretation of trial evidence. This article focuses on several of these interventions and the factors that may increase or undermine their effectiveness. Most Americans are aware of the existence of explicit bias and its effects on decision making generally, but implicit bias is still a relatively new concept about which many people in the justice system are unaware. The first section of this article discusses the difference between explicit bias and implicit bias and why contemporary researchers have become more convinced that much of the disparity in legal outcomes for African-Americans compared to whites is likely due to implicit bias. We then describe different interventions that have been proposed to reduce the impact of implicit bias, and findings from empirical research about their effectiveness. One complication of these interventions is that some otherwise well-intentioned approaches can provoke a backlash effect in which the individuals exposed to the intervention are actually more likely to make judgments or behave in ways that manifest prejudice. In the context of administering these interventions with trial jurors, there are a number of pros and cons, many of which involve purely logistical concerns. We conclude with an update about interventions that are currently being tried, including a pilot test of an implicit-bias jury instruction. This abstract has been taken from the body of the article.
Source: Lincoln (University of Nebraska)
Authors: Jennifer K. Elek, Paula Hannaford‐Agor
Language: English
Subfield: Law
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W2999788596