What Does It Mean to Deliberate? An Interpretative Account of Jurors’ Expressed Deliberative Rules and Premises

Abstract

To advance deliberative theory and practice, this study considers the experiences of trial jurors who engaged in deliberation. Conceptualized as a speech event, this article inductively explores the deliberative rules and premises articulated by jurors. Jurors believe deliberation should be rigorous and democratic, including speaking opportunities for all, open-minded consideration of different views, and respectful listening. Jurors actively consider information, but face-to-face deliberation is essential for thoroughly processing evidence. Although emotions should not influence the final verdict, participants report that emotions often reinforce deliberative norms. These results inform theory and deliberative experiences in and beyond the jury.

Keywords:

• Deliberation
• Emotion
• Jury
• Political Communication
• Small Groups

Acknowledgments

An earlier version of this article was presented at that National Communication Association annual conference by the first author. These data come from a larger corpus of data collected with the support of the National Science Foundation's Law and Social Science Program. Any opinions expressed in this essay are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Foundation.

Notes

We are deeply aware of research on groups and small-group interaction that could be relevant to understanding deliberative practice. The purpose of this study is to further the link between deliberative theory and the actual practice of deliberation. For this reason, we have not focused on relevant small-group research that might predict how individuals interact and make decisions; instead, we are focused on how jury experiences might help refine deliberative theory and practice.

(a) What was the main reason for the rating you gave your jury duty experience? (b) At the conclusion of your trial (whether it ended in a final verdict, a mistrial, a hung jury, or your dismissal), did the judge say anything memorable to you or the jury as a whole? If yes, please summarize the judge's words. (c) Some jurors report that they have strong emotional reactions in relation to the trial they witnessed. Thinking back on the trial, what emotions did you feel during the trial? If you did feel emotions, in just a few words, what would be the strongest of those? [A sub-sample of jurors had surveys that included a similar question about emotions felt “during the juror deliberations.”] (d) [Last question in survey] If there is anything else you would like to tell us about your experience in jury service, please do so in the space provided.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Leah Sprain

Leah Sprain (Ph.D., University of Washington, 2009) is an assistant professor in the Department of Communication at University of Colorado Boulder.

John Gastil

John Gastil (Ph.D., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1994) is professor in the Department of Communication Arts & Sciences at the Pennsylvania State University.