From Group Member to Democratic Citizen: How Deliberating with Fellow Jurors Reshapes Civic Attitudes

This investigation assesses the attitudinal impact of one of America’s most distinctive and famous group activities — jury deliberation. Tocqueville and the U.S. Supreme Court have both reasoned that jury service can promote civic engagement and recent research supports this view. The present study examines whether the attitudinal impact of jury deliberation depends on the quality of one’s jury experience. Two panel surveys of 2,410 total jurors tested the reciprocal relationship between the subjective experience of deliberation and the changes in civic attitudes toward oneself, fellow citizens, and public institutions. Principal results of structural equation models showed multiple effects of jury deliberation on attitudes, but there were no effects on one’s civic identity and political self-efficacy. Reciprocally, every civic attitude except faith in fellow citizens was predictive of deliberative experience in at least one of the two studies. Overall, the study bolsters the claim of deliberative democratic theorists that the experience of consequential face-to-face talk can make private individuals into public citizens by reinforcing their confidence in fellow citizens and public institutions.

[1]  E. Lambeth.  With Malice toward All? the Media and Public Confidence in Democratic Institutions , 2000 .

[2]  Jane J. Mansbridge.  Beyond Adversary Democracy , 1980 .

[3]  R. Niemi,et al.  Measuring Internal Political Efficacy in the 1988 National Election Study , 1991, American Political Science Review.

[4]  William P. Eveland,et al.  Community Integration, Local Media Use, and Democratic Processes , 1996 .

[5]  John Gastil,et al.  By Popular Demand: Revitalizing Representative Democracy Through Deliberative Elections , 2000 .

[6]  Richard Sennett,et al.  The Fall of Public Man , 1977 .

[7]  A. O’Connor.  Merchant of Mercy, Merchant of Death: How Values Advocacy Messages Influence Jury Deliberations , 2006 .

[8]  Kenneth J. Gergen,et al.  Narratives of the self. , 1997 .

[9]  William P. Eveland,et al.  Information and Expression in a Digital Age , 2005, Commun. Res..

[10]  The Effects of Campaign Participation on Political Attitudes , 1997 .

[11]  John Gastil,et al.  The Deliberative Democracy Handbook: Strategies For Effective Civic Engagement In The Twenty-First Century , 2005 .

[12]  S. Chambers,et al.  DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRATIC THEORY , 2003 .

[13]  E. G. Bormann.  Symbolic Convergence Theory and Communication in Group Decision Making , 1996 .

[14]  S. Adler.  The Jury: Trial and Error in the American Courtroom , 1994 .

[15]  M. Browne,et al.  Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit , 1992 .

[16]  Donald J. Pierce,et al.  Democracy in America , 2018, Princeton Readings in Political Thought.

[17]  J. Bohman.  Public Reason and Cultural Pluralism , 1995 .

[18]  W. Keith.  Democracy as Discussion: Civic Education and the American Forum Movement , 2007 .

[19]  Linda L. Putnam,et al.  Bona fide groups: A reconceptualization of groups in context , 1990 .

[20]  P. Bentler,et al.  Significance Tests and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis of Covariance Structures , 1980 .

[21]  J. S. Long,et al.  Testing Structural Equation Models , 1993 .

[22]  Joshua Cohen,et al.  DELIBERATION AND DEMOCRATIC LEGITIMACY , 2005, Philosophy, Politics, Democracy.

[23]  John Gastil,et al.  A Conceptual Definition and Theoretical Model of Public Deliberation in Small Face—to—Face Groups , 2002 .

[24]  J. Bohman,et al.  Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics , 1997 .

[25]  Dennis F. Thompson,et al.  Democracy and Disagreement , 1996 .

[26]  Ann Burnett Pettus.  “The verdict is in: A study of jury decision making factors, moment of personal decision, and jury deliberations—from the jurors' point of view” , 1990 .

[27]  Henry E. Brady,et al.  Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics , 1996 .

[28]  B. Byrne.  Structural equation modeling with EQS : basic concepts, applications, and programming , 2000 .

[29]  Diane M. Badzinski,et al.  An exploratory study of argument in the jury decision‐making process , 2000 .

[30]  P. Chisnall.  Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method , 2007, Journal of Advertising Research.

[31]  M. D. Carpini,et al.  Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: A review of the empirical literature , 2004 .

[32]  N. Vidmar.  World jury systems , 2000 .

[33]  Diana C. Mutz.  Cross-cutting Social Networks: Testing Democratic Theory in Practice , 2002, American Political Science Review.

[34]  J. Cappella,et al.  Spiral of Cynicism: The Press and the Public Good , 1997 .

[35]  A. Bandura.  Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory , 1985 .

[36]  S. Finkel.  Reciprocal Effects of Participation and Political Efficacy: A Panel Analysis , 1985 .

[37]  R. Drechsel.  Distorting the Law: Politics, Media, and the Litigation Crisis , 2006 .

[38]  John E. Hunter,et al.  An Information-Processing Model of Jury Decision Making , 1991 .

[39]  Bert Pryor,et al.  The Effects of a Defendant's Demeanor on Juror Perceptions of Credibility and Guilt , 1984 .

[40]  Stephen L. Elkin.  Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform , 1991 .

[41]  Michael E. Morrell.  Deliberation, Democratic Decision-Making and Internal Political Efficacy , 2005 .

[42]  E. Shils.  The Constitution Of Society , 1982 .

[43]  W. Barnett Pearce,et al.  Moral Conflict: When Social Worlds Collide , 1997 .

[44]  Richard G. Niemi,et al.  Political efficacy and trust: A report on the NES pilot study items , 1990 .

[45]  William M. Sullivan,et al.  Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life , 1985 .

[46]  D. Seibold,et al.  Jurors' intuitive rules for deliberation: A structurational approach to communication injury decision making , 1998 .

[47]  John Gastil.  Adult Civic Education Through the National Issues Forums: Developing Democratic Habits and Dispositions Through Public Deliberation , 2004 .

[48]  T. G. Plax,et al.  12 Exploring Consequences of Group Communication in the Classroom: Unraveling Relational Learning , 2002 .

[49]  James Price Dillard,et al.  The aims, methods, and effects of deliberative civic education through the national issues forums , 1999 .

[50]  R. Asen.  Toward a Normative Conception of Difference in Public Deliberation , 1999 .

[51]  V. Hans.  Business on Trial: The Civil Jury and Corporate Responsibility , 2000 .

[52]  Tali Mendelberg.  THE DELIBERATIVE CITIZEN: THEORY AND EVIDENCE , 2009 .

[53]  I. Ajzen.  The theory of planned behavior , 1991 .

[54]  Steven E. Finkel,et al.  Causal Analysis With Panel Data , 1995, SAGE Research Methods Foundations.

[55]  David Dryden Henningsen,et al.  The Effect of Individual Difference Variables on Information Sharing in Decision-Making Groups , 2004 .

[56]  J. Cappella,et al.  Argument Repertoire as a Reliable and Valid Measure of Opinion Quality: Electronic Dialogue During Campaign 2000 , 2002 .

[57]  D. Jeannie.  Habits of the Heart Individualism and Commitment in American Life , 2009 .

[58]  James S. Fishkin,et al.  Bringing Deliberation to the Democratic Dialogue , 1999 .

[59]  John Gastil,et al.  Jury Service and Electoral Participation: A Test of the Participation Hypothesis , 2008, The Journal of Politics.

[60]  R. Bales.  Interaction process analysis , 1976 .

[61]  S. Verba,et al.  The Civic Culture , 1963 .

[62]  Robert D. Putnam,et al.  Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community , 2000, CSCW '00.

[63]  Eunkyong L. Yook,et al.  Perceptions of international teaching assistants: The interrelatedness of intercultural training, cognition, and emotion , 1999 .

[64]  Mark E. Warren,et al.  Democratic Theory and Self-Transformation , 1992, American Political Science Review.

[65]  D. Ryfe,et al.  The Practice of Deliberative Democracy: A Study of 16 Deliberative Organizations , 2002 .

[66]  Diane M. Badzinski,et al.  Judge Nonverbal Communication on Trial: Do Mock Trial Jurors Notice? , 2005 .

[67]  John Gastil,et al.  Civic Awakening in the Jury Room: A Test of the Connection between Jury Deliberation and Political Participation , 2002, The Journal of Politics.

[68]  R. Peterson,et al.  7. A contingent configuration approach to understanding the role of personality in organizational groups , 2001 .

[69]  J. B. Harvey.  The Fall of Public Man , 1977 .

[70]  A. Giddens.  The Constitution of Society , 1985 .

[71]  John F. Sherry,et al.  The Meeting: Gatherings in Organizations and Communities. , 1991 .

[72]  William P. Eveland.  The Cognitive Mediation Model of Learning From the News , 2001, Commun. Res..

[73]  Seyla Benhabib,et al.  Situating the Self: Gender, Community and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics. , 1996 .