Doctoral Dissertation Research: Adequacy of Voir Dire Questioning for Selecting an Impartial Jury

为法庭审判选派公正的陪审团的一个关键是审慎的过程，在这个过程中，法官、律师或两者都询问潜在的陪审员他们的背景、历史和信仰，以确定他们是否有资格担任陪审员。为了找出有偏见的未来陪审员，律师和法官必须对问题作出充分和准确的答复。社会科学研究表明，陪审员不会提供这样的回应，也不会承认存在偏见。辩护律师和法官提出的问题的种类和质量是其不足之处的一个明显原因。本研究将从社会科学的提问和面谈标准来评估典型提问的充分性，然后考察提问充分性与陪审员偏见识别之间的关系。本研究的理论和方法论意义在于，它将提供系统的关于情境性提问的知识，并展示一种评估该程序的方法。更广泛的意义在于，这项研究应该确定第六修正案所保证的选派公正陪审团的预见性有效性方面的潜在改进。

One key to empanelling an impartial jury for a courtroom trial is the process of voir dire in which the judge, the attorneys, or both, question potential jurors about their background, history, and beliefs in order to determine whether they are qualified to serve. To identify biased prospective jurors, attorneys and judges must elicit adequate and accurate responses to questions. Social science research has shown that jurors do not provide such responses and resist admitting to bias. An apparent reason for voir dire's shortcomings is the kind and quality of questions asked by attorneys and judges. This research will assess the adequacy of typical questioning during voir dire in terms of social science standards of questioning and interviewing, and then examine the relationship between the adequacy of the questioning and the identification of juror bias. The theoretical and methodological significance of this research is that it will provide systematic knowledge about voir dire questioning and demonstrate a method for the evaluation of that procedure. The broader significance is that the research should identify potential improvements in the effectiveness of voir dire for empanelling an impartial jury as guaranteed by the 6th Amendment.