difficulties with following the law as provided by the
court. Finally, most jury questionnaires include some
measures dealing with familiarity with the case (par-
ticularly if there was some pretrial publicity) and
knowledge of the witnesses, lawyers, parties, or others
associated with the case.
Beyond these typical items, jury questionnaires
may delve into a number of other topics. Demographic
items are common and often include those dealing
with race or ethnic affiliation, gender, place of birth,
and so forth. General experiences are also often mea-
sured: These usually include service in the U.S. mili-
tary; jury experience; and prior involvement in the
criminal or civil justice system as witness, plaintiff,
defendant, or other party. Sometimes jury question-
naires delve into case-related experiences, such as hav-
ing experience with complex business transactions,
having been a victim of a workplace accident, or hav-
ing personal experience with a drug dependency prob-
lem. Jury questionnaires may also include attitudinal
items that could tap into constructs such as legal
authoritarianism, juror bias, or beliefs about a just
world, although entire scales are rarely included. More
often, there is a focus on more narrow, case-related
attitudes (e.g., Do you believe that politicians should
be held to a higher standard of moral or ethical conduct
than other people?). Finally, some jury questionnaires
are quite detailed and delve into leisure activities,
bumper stickers (presumably, these reflect jurors’ val-
ues or concerns), newspaper readership, television-
viewing habits, and other items in the same vein. Indeed,
jury questionnaires can be relatively short (10 items) or
remarkably lengthy (exceeding 200 items).
Of course, attorneys are typically looking for red
flags or any information that might raise concerns so
that they can decide whether to explore these issues
during attorney-conducted voir dire (if permitted),
whether to use a challenge for cause in an attempt to
excuse the juror from jury service, or whether to exer-
cise a peremptory challenge (typically in the event
that an initial attempt at using a challenge for cause is
unsuccessful). Trial attorneys may also use jury ques-
tionnaires to look for indicators of leadership and
receptivity to a case, relying on the assumption that a
juror who exhibits leadership potential may guide the
jury toward a particular view of the case.
When trial teams provide input into jury question-
naires, they often consider a number of strategic
issues. First, to the extent that the survey is lengthy or
acquires a lot of information, trial teams will facechallenges in gathering the relevant information and
evaluating each juror in time for jury selection. The
lengthier the survey, the more difficult it is to make
sense of the information and formulate a strategy and
the greater the need for ample time to examine the sur-
veys. In some cases, trial teams might receive 40 to 50
completed jury questionnaires and have only a short
time to examine them before jury selection begins.
Well-developed coding sheets are often helpful in
these situations.
Jury questionnaires are particularly helpful when
prior jury research reveals that certain characteristics
can predict verdicts and these predictors can be incor-
porated into the juror questionnaires. It is possible
then to estimate the probability that a particular juror
will favor one side or the other. Of course, there are
myriad factors that make these sorts of predictions
tenuous at best.
Strategically, detailed jury questionnaires may not
always be advantageous to a party. Some courts permit
juror questionnaires at the expense of attorney-
conducted voir dire, leaving lawyers with little oppor-
tunity to explore the responses further. If a party
believes that jurors are likely to support its view of the
case, a juror questionnaire may reveal supportive
jurors, giving the opposing side an advantage.
Jury questionnaires suffer from the self-report
problem; people are not very accurate at reporting
their thoughts or behaviors because of memory or
social desirability problems. Few people would dis-
close their use of illegal drugs, production of child
pornography, or history of spousal abuse, for example.
Occasionally, individuals respond dishonestly in an
attempt to survive the jury selection process and serve
as jurors on a case. Responses should be considered in
light of these limitations.
There are a number of different ways in which jury
questionnaires are administered. In some areas, indi-
viduals who are summoned for jury service complete
the surveys online and submit them in advance of the
trial date. In other areas, the jury questionnaire is
mailed to prospective jurors, who complete it and
return it to the court. Typically, the trial teams prefer
to have sufficient time to examine these completed
surveys before the voir dire process begins.Veronica StinsonSee alsoJury Selection; Legal Authoritarianism;
Pretrial Publicity, Impact on Juries; Scientific Jury
Selection; Voir Dire416 ———Jury QuestionnairesJ-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:43 PM Page 416