link footer
John Gastil Portrait

Associate Professor

Dept. of Communication
University of Washington

Contact

content header

Research

Jury and Democracy Project

Topic Map

Research Topic Map Citizen-Government Deliberation Consulting Groups & Public Protest Studies Deliberative Democracy Handbook Small Group Process Studies Community Group Consulting Jury and Democracy Project Democracy in Small Groups Issues Forum and Civic Engagement Kettering Foundation Projects Public Opinion/Attitude Studies By Popular Demand Citizen Initiative Review Initiative and Referenda Political Campaigns Cultural Cognition Project Election Day Simulation Political Consulting Deliberative Theory Political Communication and Deliberation

The bulk of my recent group research has focused on the experience of jury service. With funding from the National Science Foundation and the University of Washington Royalty Research Fund, colleagues at the University of Colorado, New Jersey Institute of Technology, and I have launched the Jury and Democracy Project.17 The heart of this project is a pair of large-scale studies completed in 2005. One was a three-wave panel survey of over 6,000 jurors from the Seattle Metropolitan and King County District and Superior Courts. The other was a national sample of court and voting records from over 23,000 jurors from seven states.

Our central finding is that jury service promotes higher levels of civic engagement. For instance, persons who deliberate on a criminal jury who are previously less politically active become more likely to vote in future elections as a result of participating in jury deliberation. We discovered this result initially in a study of Thurston County jurors,18 and on the strength of that pilot study we obtained the funds necessary to replicate and extend those findings with the national study. Combined with the King County panel study results, we can now see even more clearly the interplay of specific jury experiences and subsequent attitudes and behaviors.19 For example, one important trigger of future civic engagement is having a jury experience that exceeded one’s expectations: those who were disappointed by their experience at the courthouse went away without the civic boost that other jurors received.20

In terms of academic publishing, the culmination of this project will be a book, Civic Awakening: What the Jury Teaches America. The book will advance the understanding of political behavior in the academic, legal, and political spheres. By providing an empirical basis for longstanding philosophical claims about the civic educational impact of the jury, this work will give jury research a more central place in communication, sociology, political science, and legal research.

Citations:



17 www.jurydemocracy.org

18 Gastil, J., Deess, E. P., & Weiser, P. (2002). Civic awakening in the jury room: A test of the connection between jury deliberation and political participation. Journal of Politics, 64, 585-595.

19 The most complex connections between jury deliberation and attitude change are documented in path analyses in Gastil, J., Black, L., Deess, E. P, & Leighter, J. (in press). From group member to democratic citizen: How deliberating with fellow jurors reshapes civic attitudes. Human Communication Research.

20 Gastil & Weiser, “Jury service as an invitation to citizenship: Assessing the civic value of institutionalized deliberation” (under review at Policy Sciences Journal).

content footer