skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 98193 Find in a Library
Title: Statistical Analysis in Jury Discrimination Cases
Journal: Jurimetrics Journal  Volume:25  Issue:3  Dated:(Spring 1985)  Pages:274-289
Author(s): D H Kayer
Date Published: 1985
Page Count: 16
Type: Statistics
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This paper discusses the problems that arise in determining statistically whether a jury selection procedure is discriminatory because it results in a substantial underrepresentation of the defendant's race or identifiable group to which the defendant belongs.
Abstract: Because citizens who sit on juries are not a random sample of the adult population, the most common form of statistical underrepresentation involves comparing the proportion of the group in the total population to the population called to serve. The paper describes three statistical methods used to measure the disparity in representation: relative difference in proportions (RD), relative chance (RC), and the odds ratio (OR). Unlike RD, the RC and OR statistics work well when the underrepresented group is a small part of the eligible population as when it constitutes a larger segment. Since both are more understandable than the RD approach and because they do not rest on a retrospective point of view, they appear preferable to the statistics currently used in court opinions. Other issues that arise in measuring underrepresentation are deciding the appropriate total population for comparison purposes and the extent of disparity before discrimination can be found. The article cites several cases illustrating these problems and then discusses statistical techniques for detecting subtle forms of discrimination and aggregating data. It uses the cases of United States ex rel. Barksdale v. Blackburn to demonstrate how an appellate court that attempts to be its own statistician can be led astray. Tables, formulas, and 49 footnotes are included.
Index Term(s): Discrimination; Jury selection; Research methods; Statistical analysis
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.