Addressing implicit bias in the legal system: A practical intervention for fair and impartial juror decision-making

Implicit biases (IBs) are subconscious associations made about individuals based on social identities. These biases can exacerbate disparities in verdicts and sentencing, particularly for marginalised groups, and thus pose a significant challenge in the criminal justice system (CJS). Despite interventions showing promise in mitigating IBs in real-world contexts, a comprehensive approach to mitigating IBs in juror decision-making remains unclear, leaving the UK CJS without a standardised method for addressing IB among jurors.

The growing recognition of IB by judges and their calls for effective solutions, underscore the urgent need for evidence-based approaches to reduce IB in legal settings.

This research aims to fill the gap by developing and testing an evidence-based intervention to counter IBs in juror decision-making. The guiding question that has not yet been addressed by researchers is 'What and when can interventions effectively counter IBs in juror decision-making?', aiming to identify effective and practical types of interventions and the optimal time of delivery for maximum effectiveness.

The research's importance cannot be overstated in terms of its theoretical and real-world impact. First, it aims to generate new knowledge on reducing juror IB, with findings intended for broad dissemination. Second, the proposed framework could be implemented by courts, equipping jurors with tools to identify and overcome IBs, thereby leading to more impartial and fair verdicts.

Additionally, the intervention could benefit court members, including judges, seeking to address juror IB and promote equitable justice.

Therefore, this research is important, with potential implications beyond academia. It aims to promote fair justice administration and holds significant potential for advancing our understanding of IBs and contributing to the development of standardised procedures for addressing IBs in juror decision-making, ultimately promoting fairness and equity within the CJS.