Department of Psychology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, U.S.A.
Behav Sci Law. 2011 May-Jun;29(3):439-51. doi: 10.1002/bsl.967. Epub 2011 Feb 23.
The concerns of jury research have extensively focused on subject selection, yet larger issues loom. We argue that observed differences between students and non-students in mock juror studies are inconsistent at best, and that researchers are ignoring the more important issue of jury deliberation. We contend that the lack of information on deliberating jurors and/or juries is a much greater threat to ecological validity and that some of our basic findings and conclusions in the literature today might be different if we had used juries, not non-deliberating jurors, as the unit of measure. Finally, we come full circle in our review and explore whether the debate about college and community samples might be more relevant to deliberating versus non-deliberating jurors.
陪审团研究的关注点广泛集中在被试选择上，但更大的问题正在浮现。我们认为，在模拟陪审团研究中观察到的学生和非学生之间的差异最多也就是不一致，而研究人员忽略了更重要的陪审团审议问题。我们认为，缺乏关于审议陪审员和/或陪审团的信息对生态有效性构成了更大的威胁，如果我们使用陪审团而不是非审议陪审员作为衡量单位，那么我们今天在文献中的一些基本发现和结论可能会有所不同。最后，我们在综述中绕了一圈，探讨了关于大学生和社区样本的争论是否可能与审议和非审议陪审员更相关。
