Broeder (1965) found that potential jurors frequently distort their replies to questions posed during the voir dire. Considerable controversy has arisen over whether more honest, accurate information is elecited by a judge or by an attorney. The experiment manipulated two target (judge-versus attorney-conducted voir dire) and two interpersonal style variables (personal versus formal). The dependent measure was the consistency of subjects' attitude reports given at pretest and again verbally in court. One-hundred-and-sixteen jury-eligible community residents participated. The results provide support for the hypothesis that attorneys are more effective than judges in eliciting candid self-disclosure from potential jurors. Subjects changed their answers almost twice as much when questioned by a judge as when interviewed by an attorney. It was suggested that the judge's presence evokes considerable pressure toward conformity to a set of perceived judicial standards among jurors, which is minimized during an attorney voir dire.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Archer, R. L. (1979). Role of personality and the social situation. In G. J. Chelune (Ed.),Self-disclosure (pp. 28–58). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Babcock, B. A. (1975). Voir dire: Preserving its wonderful power.Standard Law Review, 27, 545–565.
Bermant, G., & Shapard, J. (1978). Voir Dire examination, juror challenges and adversary advocacy. Report No. FJC-4-78-6. Washington: Federal Judical Center.
Bonora, B., & Krauss, E. (1979).Jurywork: Systematic techniques. Atlanta: National Jury Project.
Broeder, D. W. (1965). Voir dire examinations: An empirical study.Southern California Law Review, 38, 503–528.
Bush, N. (1976). The case for expansive voir dire.Law and Psychology Review, 2, 9–26.
Buss, A. H. (1980).Self-consciousness and social anxiety. San Francisco: Freeman.
Chelune, G. J. (1979).Self-disclosure. San Francisco: Josey-Bass.
Critelli, J. W., Rappaport, J., & Golding, S. L. (1976). Role played self-disclosure as a function of liking and knowing.Journal of Research in Personality, 10, 89–97.
Erhlich, H. J., & Graeven, D. B. (1971). Reciprocal self-disclosure in a dyad.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 389–400.
Fenigstein, A., Scheier, M. F., & Buss, A. H. (1975). Public and private self-consciousness: Assessment and theory.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 522–527.
Froming, W. J., Walker, G. R., & Loypan, K. J. (1982). Public and private self-awareness: When personal attitudes conflict with societal expectations.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 476–487.
Gifis, S. H. (1975).Law Dictionary. New York: Barron's.
Glass, J. F. (1977). Voir dire in the federal courts: Diminishing the effectiveness of legal representation.Insurance Counsel Journal, 44, 628–633.
Goodstein, L. D., & Reinecker, V. M. (1974). Factors affecting self-disclosure: A literature review. In B. A. Maher (Ed.),Progress in experimental personality research (pp. 49–77). New York: Academic.
Jones, S. E. (1984). Pilot study 2. Unpublished raw data.
Jordon, W. E. (1981). A trial judge's observation about voir dire examinations.Defense Law Journal, 30, 222–247.
Jourard, S. M. (1959). Self-disclosure and other cathexis.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 428–431.
Jourard, S. M. (1969). The effects of experimenters' self-disclosure on subjects' behavior. In C. Speilberger (Ed.),Current topics in community and clinical psychology. New York: Academic.
Kerr, N. L., & Bray, R. M. (1982).Psychology of the courtroom. New York: Academic.
Levit, W. H., Nelson, D. W., Ball, V. C., & Chernick, R. (1971). Expediting the voir dire: An empirical study.Southern California Law Review, 44, 916–994.
Padawer-Singer, A. M., Singer, A., & Singer, R. (1974). Voir dire by two attorneys: An essential safeguard.Judicature, 57, 386–391.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981).Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, Iowa: William C. Brown.
Scheier, M. F. (1980). Effects of public and private self-consciousness on the public expression of personal beliefs.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 514–521.
Simonson, N. R. (1976). The impact of therapist disclosure on patient disclosure.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 23, 3–6.
Slobin, D. I., Miller, S. H., & Porter, L. W. (1968). Forms of address and social relations in a business organization.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 289–293.
Stanley, A. J. (1977). Who should conduct the voir dire: The judge.Judicature, 61, 70–75.
Suggs, D., & Sales, B. D. (1981). Juror self-disclosure in the voir dire: A social science analysis.Indiana Law Journal, 56, 245–271.
Van Dyke, J. (1977).Jury selection procedures: Our uncertain commitment to representative panels. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Ballinger.
Worthy, M., Gary, A. L., & Kahn, G. M. (1969). Self-disclosure as an exchange process.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 59–63.
This article is based on the author's doctoral dissertation submitted to The University of Alabama under the direction of Stanley L. Brodsky. The study was supported by grant No. 83-IJ-CX-0020 from the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view or opinions stated in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. The author wishes to extend sincere thanks to Stan Brodsky, Ron Rogers and Steve Prentice-Dunn for their generous donations of time and assistance on this project.
About this article
Cite this article
Jones, S.E. Judge-versus attorney-conducted voir dire. Law Hum Behav 11, 131–146 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01040446
- Social Psychology
- Dependent Measure
- Accurate Information
- Community Resident
- Considerable Controversy