By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm –
In a recent viral video on YouTube an old couple peers into a computer webcam, trying to figure out how to operate the device, not realizing that they are recording themselves. Beyond providing a charming vignette, the clip might also be seen as a window into the future of the American jury. As the pool of eligible and available jurors continues to get older, there are a few things to take into account, and a few misconceptions that the research tells us to set aside.
Older Americans face stereotypes when it comes to technology, but as the video couple’s game efforts show, the fastest growing Facebook demographic is poised to rewrite the rules of what it means to be senior. Assumptions about the elderly as jurors are similarly suspect. In particular, a recent study focusing on the decision making advantage of older adults gives you reason to question further before assuming that your older juror is going to have a harder time following the case and reaching a decision.
An Older Pool
There are both long-term and immediate reasons why the pool of jurors is getting older. The long-term reason is demographic, as the baby boom generation moves into its golden years, and the proportion of Americans over age 65 grows from one in eight today, to one in five over the next couple of decades. The more immediate reason is economical, as those in their working years are increasingly claiming hardship in longer trials out of concern for holding on to, or finding, work. Both trends are currently coinciding in a way that leads to a greater-than-normal proportion of senior citizens in the jury pool. The implications are actually better than you might expect.
The Implications
1. Don’t Underestimate Elderly Decision Making. The notion that “old age brings wisdom” is not just a platitude, it is a research finding. As reported in a recent Science Daily post, studies that have tended to show a decision making advantage in younger brains have had a bias. When decision making is examined, not as an isolated act, but as a sequential phenomenon (one choice leading to and informing the next choice), as it is in deliberations, then older adults proved to be better decision makers in every test (Worthy et al., 2011). One important note: While the study focuses on adults aged 60 to 80, outside the study the term “old age” has a more constant meaning — it means at least 15 years older than you are now.
Why would decision making improve with age? The researchers believe that younger people are more likely to rely on quick decision making habits and immediate rewards, but as the brain ages, these modes of thinking become less accessible, causing older brains to compensate by focusing more on pre-frontal cortex thinking: rational thought and deliberation.
Or, less technically, older people are likely to be less quick, but more wise.
2. Don’t Base Strikes on Age. As a recent column in the London Telegraph notes, it doesn’t make any sense to apply a threshold age, like 70 or over, as England and Wales does, to jury service. Jurors may be sharp and engaged into their eighties or beyond, and it must be noted, fuzzy and confused in their twenties. This is a great reason to learn as much as you can about the individual. You may notice in oral voir dire that the old woman or man in your panel is taking longer to answer or speaking more slowly, but when it comes to comprehension and deliberations, they may have some advantages over the younger jurors.
3. Gather Information in a Way That Promotes Disclosure. When being questioned by a judge, your older panelist may be more deferential to authority. In the give and take of attorney-conducted oral voir dire, your older panelist might be more reticent to speak up. In either case, they are not going to be as quick at retrieving and sharing relevant information. This adds to the many reasons to ask for a written questionnaire that jurors can fill out in the privacy of their own homes and mail in well before they come to court. With that information, you are likely to have a much better picture of your potential juror based on the person, not on the age group or any other demographic trait.
The most important message is to treat your decision makers as unique individuals and not as packages of demographic or social traits. But if the prize at the bottom of the Cracker Jack box is to know that we will make better jurors when we’re old, at least that is something. When we have a system based on wise decision making, it is nice to know that experience still counts.
______
Related Posts:
- That’s Right, The Women Are Smarter: Pay Attention to Your Jury’s Social Intelligence
- Pay Close Attention to the Big Mouths in Voir Dire
______
Darrell Worthy, Marissa Gorlick, Jennifer Pacheco, David Schnyer, W. Todd Maddox (2011). With Age Comes Wisdom: Decision-Making in Younger and Older Adults Psychological Science, (in press)
Photo Credit: rileyroxx, Flickr Creative Commons