Jannah Nassar

IR I/10 GT/2
5/6/20

Data Collection: A Literary Inquiry of the Effect of Media Infiltration on Implicit Bias in the
Courtroom and Juror Rulings.

1. What is the topic and what do you hope to discover/confirm?

The topic I am collecting data for is implicit bias in the courtroom and its effects on juror
decisions. I will research how juror perceptions are clouded by media infiltration and its effects
on the rulings of a case. In addition, I hope to confirm that a heterozygous jury panel is essential
in combating implicit bias in the courtroom.

2. What method of data collection do you intend to use and why?

I plan on using a metacognitive review as it allows me to examine my sources and create
connections between all three to see how each one can link together and support my claim.
Metacognitive reviews also allow me to examine each source more in-depth, for example, I can
lay out my thoughts and work and see what conclusions I thought of for each source, what
information was being studied, etc.

3. What sources are you using? How are you using them?
After going through all the sources I have gathered, I am going to use 3 articles and case
studies. All three are cited below, with an in-depth explanation and description. I plan on using
the sources in my paper as well as on my website. The information is very valuable in helping
support my claims that a diverse jury panel is needed to remove biases that jurors may rely on
from the outside world, including media, news outlets, and word of mouth.

4. Who is the intended audience?

The targeted audience includes jurors, attorneys, and anyone who will testify in court.
The information in the data collection is specific to implicit bias in the courtroom, as it explains
how to deal with bias as well as how jurors should identify it. Although the target audience is for
those in the legal field, the information presented can be applied in any context and goes outside
of the courtroom. Moreover, the intended audience can be anyone who faces any biases or deals
with stereotypes and would like to learn more. But that being said, the target audience is jurors,
attorneys, and anyone testifying in court.

Waters, Nicole L, and Paula Hannaford-Agor. “Jurors 24/7: the Impact of New Media on
Jurors, Public Perceptions of the Jury System, and the American Criminal Justice
 System.” National Center for State Courts, 2010.

This article was extremely beneficial in allowing a researcher to completely understand

the effect of media on juror perceptions. To do so, the author references a study in which the
researcher studied the brains ability to understand information and how it is retained. The
conclusions found revealed that each brain interprets the same information in different ways.
Correlating to this, people from similar backgrounds tend to understand and interpret in similar
ways. By connecting the two points, the researcher was able to conclude that media affects juror
perceptions causing them to view information differently. In addition, the brain will remember
negative connotations and unconsciously associate them with people or items that relate to that
idea. This article was crucial in proving that the media affects juror decisions as it changes the
way the brain can retain the information. Therefore, a heterozygous jury is essential as multiple
brains are needed and multiple brains from different backgrounds are needed to retain the
information differently; providing more perspectives.

This article was very beneficial as it allowed all the points of research to come together
and prove the claim. The authors ideas were clear and easy to follow, and they provided an in-
depth explanation leaving the reader with a full understanding. This article would be great for
closing up research as it requires the reader to have a small amount of background knowledge
and a clear claim to support. The information is accurate and reliable as it was written by the
National Center for State Courts. Overall, the article was beneficial and allowed the researcher to
see the effect of implicit bias outside of the courtroom but still information that applies to the
courtroom.

“What Are the Benefits of Having Diversity in a Jury Panel?” Litigation Insights, 30 Sept.
2015, https://www.litigationinsights.com.

In this article, the author explains the need for having a diverse jury panel and its effects
on rulings in the courtroom. The bottom line is that diversity matters in every case. No matter the
case, whether big or small, a jury composed of multiple races and ethnicities limits the amount of
bias that can be used when formulating the decision. First, the public is more likely to accept the
verdict if it is decided by a diverse group of jurors. The author then explains the value of having
a diverse jury. Social science research explains Justice Thurgood Marshall was correct when he
stated that diverse juries are more likely to “get it right” and come up with an accurate ruling.
This is because “Diverse juries promote vigorous debate, which encourages jurors to examine a
case’s facts and evidence more carefully.” Research also shows that diverse juries are better at
determining what is reasonable as opposed to homogenous juries. The author then closes off by
explaining the need for a diverse jury. Diverse juries are essential to presenting a fair and equal
trial which everyone is given the right to in their sixth amendment rights.

The article is very informative and would be extremely beneficial to researchers

interested in the effect of diverse juries. The reader can learn a plenitude of information and will
most likely be able to apply the information in their everyday lives. The author was clear and
concise and presented the information in a way that was clear and easy to follow. Overall, the
 article is a great way to further one’s research. It is reliable and accurate as it comes from a very
prestigious organization and the author has a Phd in jury research.
Jerry Kang, Jennifer Mnookin, et al. “Implicit Bias in the Courtroom.” UCLA LAW, pp. 5–
10, https://www.uclalawreview.org.

In this UCLA law review, the authors explain in great detail implicit bias and the
methods they have discovered to stop or control it. The authors explain how attitudes and
stereotypes are explicit biases and these count as social cognitions. This is due to the fact that
they are introspective and endorsed as appropriate by those people. They also describe the
difference between the ISC (implicit social cognition) and the IAT (Implicit Association Test).
The ISC is conventional beliefs such as attitudes or stereotypes and can be implicit or explicit.
The IAT is known for being a sorting task that measures differences between schema-consistent
pairings and inconsistent pairings of concepts. The concept of intergroup discrimination was
measured better than explicit bias. The article was mainly focused on explaining to the reader the
differences in IAT and ISC and implicit and explicit bias in the courtroom. This was all to
explain empirical introduction. The author then explains theoretical classification. To do so, they
explained that if norms existed then explicit bias can be concealed to manage impressions that
others have of us.
This article was very beneficial in that it explained key concepts in a new and informative
way. Several articles are redundant and repetitive however, this article portrayed information in a
new way and kept the reader engaged. Although, this article does require the reader to have prior
background knowledge as they refer to terminology that is not defined in the article. This source
was without a doubt credible as it comes from a highly prestigious and trusted university, UCLA.
Overall, this was a very helpful article, however, at times, the reader is left confused or almost
overwhelmed due to the terminology used.

Article 1 Article 2 Article 3

Title: “Jurors 24/7: the Impact of New “What are the Benefits of “Implicit Bias in the
Media on Jurors, Public having a Diverse Jury Panel?” Courtroom”
Perceptions of the Jury System,
and the American Criminal
Justice System”

Citation: “What Are the Benefits of Jerry Kang, Jennifer

Waters, Nicole L, and Paula
Hannaford-Agor. “Jurors
24/7: the Impact of New
Media on Jurors, Public
Perceptions of the Jury
System, and the
American Criminal
Justice System.” National
Having Diversity in a Jury
Panel?” Litigation Insights,
30 Sept. 2015,
https://www.litigationinsigh
ts.com/benefits-diversity-
jury/.
Mnookin, et al. “Implicit
Bias in the Courtroom.”
UCLA LAW, pp. 5–10,
https://www.uclalawreview
.org/pdf/59-5-1.pdf.
 Center for State Courts,
2010.
Purpose of Study: News outlets, social media, and
other media sources are affecting
public perception of the jury
system as well as causing jurors
to have a shift in opinion,
regardless if they are to be
impartial.
Methods: The study gathered information
from various trials and
determined whether the juror had
a case of “internet-juror” based
on the activity of the juror. “That
study involved a very small
sample of trials; however, it is
clear from court opinions and
news stories discussing the
problem of the “Googling juror”
that the risk is not purely
hypothetical.
Results From “The article provided an
Researchers: overview of how the
development of various
technologies—written language,
the mechanical clock, the
printing press, radio and
television—all affected the
brain’s neural circuitry... If so,
that prospect will have a
profound impact on juror
decision-making, especially how
trial jurors receive and interpret
information during the course of
a trial.”
How does the When exposed to any form of
media affect juror information the brain tries its best
perceptions: to interpret the information as
effectively and efficiently as
possible. The way the
information is presented affects
Sommer’s Study determined
whether there really was a
difference between having a
heterozygous and homozygous
jury panel and how the
difference plays out when
coming to a conclusion.
In the Sommer’s Study, there
were two groups of jurors, in
one group there was a mix of
different ethnicities and people
from al; different nationalities.
In the other group, it was a
homozygous jury panel with no
diversity.
The researchers found that the
heterozygous jury panel had
spent more time deliberating and
discussing the facts. Whereas,
the homozygous jury panel was
able to come to an agreed
conclusion much quicker.
Media causes jurors to cloud
their memory and they are
forced to rely on the inaccurate
biases heard in the media. When
the information portrayed in the
media is inaccurate, the juror
The study was used to
determine how different
ethnicities will face implicit
bias, along with where the
biases are stemming from.
The researchers examined a
number of cases and evidence
to create a detailed conclusion.
Researchers went through
examples, evidence, and
various sources to see how
implicit bias was used or not
used in each case.
Different ethnicities and
backgrounds will face different
punishments and experiences in
the courtroom. For instance,
“capital punishment defense
attorneys show negative
implicit attitudes toward
African Americans”
The media portrays various
ethnicities with certain
connotations and these
connotations carry out into the
courtroom clouding juror
perception. If the media
 the brain’s neural circuitry.
What are possible Because each brain interprets
ways to combat information in different ways, it
juror bias: is crucial to have more than one
juror and because jurors from
similar backgrounds think in
similar ways; diverse jury panels
are crucial.
What Makes the The brain will remember any
Media the Most information that is presented to it
Dangerous: in a special or shocking way. For
this reason, media outlets often
display negative views of certain
ethnicities. If a juror is exposed
to this connotation, when they
are ruling on a case they will
unconsciously decide based on
these negative stereotypes that
may not be true to all people
from that ethnicity.
Conclusions: The article was able to prove that
the media has an effect on the
brain along with the way
information is portrayed. Jurors
will “take the form of
preconceptions and knowledge of
the world that they use to
construct narratives or stories
from trial evidence and fill in
missing details to increase the
story’s internal consistency and
convergence with their world
knowledge.”
decisions are now unreliable.
To decrease the amount of bias
jurors rely on, a jury panel
should be composed of jurors
from various ethnicities and
backgrounds.
The media that is portrayed
create heuristics that are not
applicable to all members of a
minority and can only apply to
some members. This makes
them inaccurate and overall
unjust to use in a case.e
The heterozygous jury panel
was able to deliberate longer not
only because there were more
perspectives but because “in
diverse juries, all members of
the group take more care to
examine the evidence and reflect
critically”
perceptions are incorrect, the
juror perceptions will be
inaccurate as well.
One possible way to combat
juror bias is by using only
information presented in the
trials and allowing a diverse
jury panel of people from all
genders, ethnicities, and
backgrounds.
Typically, the media will
display different minorities
through negative points of
view, often these views are part
of the story and a result of
another action.
The researchers concluded that
there are various types of bias,
however, implicit bias is most
dangerous and causes
ethnicities to be treated in
different ways due to
perceptions and negative
connotations heard about them.