Juries and Viewpoint Representation
To generate high-quality deliberations, juries should be diverse in terms of not only demographics but also viewpoints. Using data from the Survey of Texas Adults (n = 1380), we examine whether existing processes select for individuals who represent the population on a variety of viewpoint characteristics, particularly whether the process of forming juries selects for people who are more independent-minded versus authority-minded. We find, on average, that those who believe in the importance of speaking English, are less compassionate, support Biblical literalism, and express more concern about the community effects of wrongdoing are more likely to have been former jurors than to not have served. Death penalty support is also modestly predictive of jury membership. Non-jurors rate their neighborhoods as cleaner than do former jurors. Results point to composition effects in the summonsing process and to the possibility that some types of people exempt themselves from this civic obligation.