Jury and Democracy Project (ICPSR 32801)

Version Date: May 11, 2016

Cite this study |

Principal Investigator(s):
John Gastil, Pennsylvania State University; Perry Deess, New Jersey Institute of Technology; Phillip J. Weiser, University of Colorado

https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR32801.v1

Version V1

Slide tabs to view more

Summary

The Jury and Democracy Project aims to understand the impact that jury service has on citizens. Until recently, no direct empirical evidence regarding the link between jury service and public engagement existed. The Jury and Democracy Project has produced such data. This study consists of two datasets. Part 1, the National Jury Archival Data, consists of a merger of jury and voting records from 1994-2004 in Boulder County (Colorado), Cumberland and Swain Counties (North Carolina), Douglas County (Nebraska), El Paso County (Texas), Orleans Parish (Louisiana), Summit County (Ohio), and Thurston County (Washington). Part 1 includes information regarding seriousness and type of charges, duration of trial and trial information, county and juror information, juror role and voter information, and basic demographic information such as sex, age, political affiliation, and race. Part 2, the King County Survey Data, includes three waves of panel survey data collected from Washington state's King County Court and the Seattle Municipal Courthouse during 2004-2005. In Wave 1 all jurors in King County Court and Seattle Municipal Courthouse received the same survey which collected data on pre-service attitudes, demographics, and past jury duty service and behavior characteristics. Wave 2 consisted of two surveys: (1) King County Court jurors were surveyed on jury duty service experience and treatment, as well as jury selection, court and government efficacy, and citizen responsibility; (2) Seattle Municipal Courthouse jurors were surveyed on the same variables as the King County juror survey, as well as jury deliberation issues. Wave 3 also consisted of two surveys: (1) King County and Seattle Municipal Court jurors were surveyed on their involvement in politics and public affairs, participation in the local community, reflections on jury service, and political views; (2) an additional Wave 3 survey was given to a control replacement sample, which collected data on politics and public life, as well as involvement in politics and public affairs, participation in the local community, the political process, jury service, and demographic characteristics such as sex, race, age, and education level.

Citation

Gastil, John, Deess, Perry, and Weiser, Phillip J. Jury and Democracy Project. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2016-05-11. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR32801.v1

Export Citation:

  • RIS (generic format for RefWorks, EndNote, etc.)
  • EndNote

Funding

National Science Foundation. Law and Social Science Program (NSF 0318513), University of Washington. Royalty Research Fund

Subject Terms

Geographic Coverage

Smallest Geographic Unit

county

Restrictions

This data collection may not be used for any purpose other than statistical reporting and analysis. Use of these data to learn the identity of any person or establishment is prohibited. To protect respondent privacy, this data collection is restricted from general dissemination. To obtain this file, researchers must agree to the terms and conditions of a Restricted Data Use Agreement in accordance with existing ICPSR servicing policies.

Distributor(s)

Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
Hide

Time Period(s)

1994 -- 2004 (Part 1, National Jury Archival Data), 2004 -- 2005 (Part 2, King County Survey Data)

Date of Collection

1994 -- 2004 (Part 1, National Jury Archival Data), 2004 -- 2005 (Part 2, King County Survey Data)

Data Collection Notes

  1. The original data collection was produced by University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

  2. Special collaborators for the Jury and Democracy Project include lead research assistant, Jay Leighter.

  3. Complete survey instruments and additional background information on this study are available at the Jury and Democracy Project Web site.

Hide

Sample

Users should refer to the Methodological Appendix found in the Codebook under Original P.I. Documentation for further explanation of sampling techniques for Part 1, National Jury Archival Data. Users should also note that thirty-five percent of the Orleans Parish jurors were from an oversample of non-jury verdict outcomes within the National Jury Archival Data. The sampling strategy for Part 2, King County Survey Data involved researchers attempting to approach every person who signed in for jury duty to request their voluntary participation in a study on community life during the study period. Random subsets of those jurors that responded in Wave 1 were contacted regarding participation in Waves 2 and 3 of the survey. Additional information can be found at the Jury and Democracy Project Web site.

Time Method

Cross-sectional

Universe

Part 1, National Jury Archival Data, includes all empanelled jurors from Boulder County, Colorado; Cumberland and Swain Counties, North Carolina; Douglas County, Nebraska; El Paso County, Texas; Orleans Parish, Louisiana; Summit County, Ohio; and Thurston County, Washington during 1994-1995, plus a random side-sample of jurors dismissed/not used. Part 2, King County Survey Data (Washington), includes a sample of jurors during 2004-2005 who reported for jury duty.

Unit(s) of Observation

individual

Data Type(s)

Mode of Data Collection

Response Rates

King County Court Wave 1 survey: According to King County court records, 2,655 persons deliberated on juries during the study period, and 2,136 completed Wave 1 surveys yielding a response rate of 80.4 percent, though the cooperation rate is estimated as 84 percent, as 4 percent of those reporting to service were sent to courtrooms before research staff could administer the survey. King County Court Wave 2 survey: After contacting 1,216 deliberating jurors again via a valid email or mailing address, 969 provided complete Wave 2 surveys, yielding a response rate of 80 percent. King County Court Wave 3 survey: In November 2004, jurors were contacted a final time to complete the survey and, with repeated contacts, a response rate of 77 percent was obtained. Seattle Municipal Courthouse Wave 1 survey: 79 percent of those appearing for jury duty service completed the survey. Seattle Municipal Courthouse Wave 2 survey: 87 percent of those invited to participate completed the survey. One important procedural difference was that exactly 50 percent of the sample completed their Wave 2 survey at the courthouse itself, just after completion of their jury service. In terms of the variables measured, this sample included only 14 hung jurors, so no contrast variable was created to distinguish between those who reached full verdicts and those who did not. Seattle Municipal Courthouse Wave 3 survey: 64 percent of those invited to participate completed the survey.

Hide

Original Release Date

2012-10-08

Version History

2018-02-15 The citation of this study may have changed due to the new version control system that has been implemented. The previous citation was:

  • Gastil, John , Perry Deess, and Phillip J. Weiser. Jury and Democracy Project. ICPSR32801-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2012-10-08. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR32801.v1

2016-05-11 The codebook and data collection instrument have been made publicly available.

2012-10-08 ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection:

  • Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.

Hide

Notes