The invisible jury member: childhood trauma's silent role in the courtroom

Abstract

This study aimed to provide a better understanding of how a juror’s history of childhood trauma may affect their judgment of a defendant’s guilt and, as well as their level of empathy toward them. Previous research has indicated that a juror's decision making abilities can be influenced by factors in their personal life. Childhood trauma is one of these factors that can impact decision making as well as empathy. I hypothesized that jurors with a history of childhood trauma would exhibit more empathy toward the defendant, and that it will have a negative relationship with the juror’s perception of the defendant’s guilt and credibility. Eligible participants for Oklahoma jury duty were invited to participate, disclose their childhood trauma, and give their verdicts and credibility ratings. If participants were eligible for jury duty, they were asked to provide their demographics. After this they were asked to read a case summary detailing the death of a father at the hands of his son. Participants were then given the Revised Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Questionnaire, followed by the shortened form of the Empathy Quotient (EQ-Short). A recording, as well as a typed out version, of the jury instructions was then provided. After this, participants were asked to provide their verdict, culpability ratings, and sentencing recommendations. To ensure the participants read all parts of the study, they were provided with a four question reading check at the conclusion of the survey. This data was collected through a Qualtrics survey. The analyses used were a Pearson Correlation, a Spearman Correlation, and the Hayes PROCESS. This study found no significant results regarding the relationships between participants' trauma and empathy or participant’s trauma and guilt rating. Empathy was not found to be a mediator between trauma and guilt or trauma and culpability. There was a significant negative correlation between participant’s trauma and their culpability ratings of the defendant. The limitations include a more educated participant pool, the materials used, the participants not generalizing to the rest of the Oklahoma population, and the use of a mock jury and a generated transcript. Further research should employ a different empathy measure, and use an additional measure to ask participants about their own mental health diagnoses, as well as their stigmas toward mental illness. The right to an unbiased trial is a key principle in the United States justice system. Studying juror biases and what can impact them can lead to more impartial trials for defendants and a more equitable system overall.