Evaluation Review

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click Here for More Information

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Berk, R. A.
Right arrow Articles by Swan, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Berk, R. A.
Right arrow Articles by Swan, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Evaluation Review, Vol. 1, No. 1, 143-158 (1977)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X7700100106

The Vagaries and Vulgarities of "Scientific" Jury Selection

A Methodological Evaluation

Richard A. Berk

University of California, Santa Barbara

Michael Hennessy

Abt Associates

James Swan

Northwestern University

Beginning with such famous cases as the Harrisburg conspiracy trial, the use of "scientific" jury selection has gained wide publicity and numerous advocates. Both profit and nonprofit organizations are increasingly offering such services for "good" causes and/or hard cash. Yet no rigorous evaluation of scientific jury selection has ever been undertaken, and impressionistic data on its effectiveness are at best equivocal. In an effort to present a more balanced assessment, this paper undertakes a consciously skeptical examination of the kinds of survey data routinely used to inform the juror- selection process.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?