Testing The Courts' Assumptions About Using Juror Rehabilitation In A Child Sexual Abuse Case

Biases in the courtroom come in a variety of forms which, in theory, would be revealed through the jury selection process. If biases arise, the court has a mechanism in place that is assumed to prevent bias from impacting the decision-making process. This mechanism is juror rehabilitation, and past research has suggested that reduction in biased attitudes from using this mechanism might not be strong enough to influence the verdict (Crocker & Kovera, 2009). The present study examined rehabilitative questioning in a case of delayed disclosure of familial child sexual abuse, where the defendant is at a jury trial for a charge of continuous sexual abuse of a child. This study found that overall, neither verdict nor change in biased perceptions were influenced by rehabilitative questioning, but that biased participants were likely to vote guilty more often than non-biased participants. Additionally, none of the explored variables were related to this change in biased perceptions and attitudes. There is limited research that examines how rehabilitative questioning might influence the decision-making process. This study adds to the literature to work towards applying scientific knowledge to jury selection practices