Review Approach

This review draws on empirical, theoretical, and policy literature across psychology, law, sociology, political science, and communication. The foundational literature was identified through established reviews and meta-analyses, particularly Devine (2012), Devine et al. (2001), and Bornstein and Greene (2011, 2017), and supplemented by systematic searches of Law and Human Behavior, the Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, and Psychiatry, Psychology and Law. For the review of advances from 2020 through 2025, targeted searches were conducted in PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Google Scholar using combinations of terms including “jury,” “juror,” “deliberation,” “verdict,” “mock jury,” “polarization,” and “institutional trust,” restricted to publications from January 2020 through early 2026.

Grey literature, including court-administration reports from the National Center for State Courts and public-opinion data from the Annenberg Public Policy Center, Pew Research Center, and Gallup, was included where it provided primary data on institutional trends not available in peer-reviewed sources. Inclusion was not governed by a formal systematic review protocol; rather, the review prioritized empirical studies with clearly specified methods and sample sizes sufficient to support generalizable conclusions, consistent with Devine’s (2012) definition of jury research. Where non-peer-reviewed sources are drawn upon, that limitation is noted explicitly.