2021/02/14 by Andrea Moro, Martin Van der Linden, Moro, Andrea +1
Economics, Econometrics and Finance · Social Sciences · #FOS: Economics and business #Game Theory and Voting Systems #General Economics (econ.GN) #Jury Decision Making Processes #Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems #Theoretical Economics (econ.TH)
paper · pdf · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2102.07222
openalex publication_date 2021/02/14 · openalex created_date 2021/04/13 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
We compare two jury selection procedures meant to safeguard against the\ninclusion of biased jurors that are perceived as causing minorities to be\nunder-represented. The Strike and Replace procedure presents potential jurors\none-by-one to the parties, while the Struck procedure presents all potential\njurors before the parties exercise their challenges. Struck more effectively\nexcludes extreme jurors but leads to a worse representation of minorities. The\nadvantage of Struck in terms of excluding extremes is sizable in a wide range\nof cases. In contrast, Strike and Replace better represents minorities only if\nthe minority and majority are polarized. Results are robust to assuming the\nparties statistically discriminate against jurors based on group identity.\n