THERE ARE SIX MAJOR THREATS TO THE EXTERNAL VALIDITY AND POLICY RELEVANCE OF PRESENT JURY SIMULATION RESEARCH: THE USE OF STUDENTS AS SUBJECTS WHEN THEY DO NOT REPRESENT THE POPULATION FROM WHICH JURIES ARE DRAWN; THE USE OF BRIEF WRITTEN CASE SUMMARIES, WHICH CANNOT MIRROR THE COMPLEXITY OF ACTUAL TRIALS; THE LACK OF FOCUS ON COLLECTIVE JURY DECISIONS; THE USE OF PROBABILITY-OF-GUILT RATINGS OR SENTENCES RATHER THAN GUILTY/NOT GUILTY VERDICTS; THE LACK OF CORROBORATIVE FIELD DATA; AND THE QUESTIONABLE VALIDITY OF ROLE PLAYING AS A RESEARCH TECHNIQUE WHEN THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE REAL DECISIONMAKING TASK CAN ALTER AN INDIVIDUAL'S LIFE. NONETHELESS, THE JURY SIMULATION PARADIGM REMAINS PROMISING BECAUSE MANY POTENTIAL PROBLEMS EXISTING IN PAST APPLICATIONS CAN NOW BE SOLVED, AND BECAUSE THE JURY SIMULATION PARADIGM OFFERS SIGNIFICANT ADVANTAGES OVER FIELD RESEARCH. IN ADDITION, FUTURE METHODOLOGICAL STUDIES MAY ESTABLISH GUIDELINES FOR DRAWING INFERENCES FROM JURY SIMULATION STUDIES. CONSIDERED AS BASIC RESEARCH, JURY SIMULATION STUDIES RELATING ATTRACTION TO LENIENCY HAVE PROBLEMS OF CONSTRUCT VALIDITY AND LACK COMPARATIVE THEORY TESTING AND PRECISION. THEY HAVE ALSO FAILED TO ADDRESS SUCH IMPORTANT THEORETICAL ISSUES AS THE IMPACT OF ATTRACTIVENESS ON GROUP JUDGMENTS AND BEHAVIOR. RESEARCH ON A RANGE OF AREAS, INCLUDING GROUP DECISIONMAKING IN A SIMULATED JURY SITUATION, IS NEEDED TO IMPROVE THE PARADIGM AS A VEHICLE FOR BASIC RESEARCH. FOOTNOTES, TABULAR DATA, REFERENCES, AND REFERENCE NOTES ARE INCLUDED. (AOP)