Juror Personality on Sexual Assault Verdicts Utilizing the Big Five Model


  • Sreeja Gudiseva Oakton High School
  • Eliot Waxman Oakton High School
  • Justin Levinson University of Hawaii




Jury, Big Five Model, Sexual Assault trials


The prevalence of sexual assault and the low number of sexual assault convictions makes it imperative to research such judicial matters.  The key element or constant in each trial would be the jury.  The jury decides whether or not to convict the defendant.  In order to increase the rightful convictions, a study on jurors was done; specifically a study on juror personality.  By reviewing previous studies done on juror personality, there appears to be a connection between juror personality and bias toward sexual assault (Clark et al., 2007).  To study this, a survey was sent out to willing participants who are eligible to be jurors.  The survey included a personality test portion and a sexual assault prompt portion.  The personality test portion included questions pertaining to the Agreeableness facet and the sexual assault case prompts made the participants vote guilty or not guilty for the defendant charged.  The results showed that there was no correlation between the specific Agreeableness facet and bias toward sexual assault; however, there was evidence showing that the 31-40 Agreeableness score range (from 10-50), yielded the highest bias against the defendant.  The implications of this study have applications in various legal fields to convict sexual assaulters to a higher extent.


Download data is not yet available.

References or Bibliography

Cattell, H.E.P. & Mead, A.D. (2008). The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF®). In G. J. Boyle, G. Matthews and D. H. Saklofske (Eds.), Handbook of Personality Theory and Testing. London: Sage.

Clark, J., Boccaccini, M. T., Caillouet, B., & Chaplin, W. F. (2007). Five factor model personality traits, jury selection, and case outcomes in criminal and civil cases. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(5), 641-660. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854806297555

Devine, D. J., Clayton, L. D., Dunford, B. B., Seying, R., & Pryce, J. (2001). Jury decision making: 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7(3), 622-727. https://doi.org/10.1037//1076-8971.7.3.622

DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the big five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 880-896. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.880

Facts About Sexual Assault. (2016, May 20). Central Minnesota Sexual Assault Center. https://cmsac.org/facts-and-statistics/#:~:text=Factoring%20in%20unreported%20rapes%2C%20only,a%2058%25%20chance%20of%20conviction.

Giovanni Garcia v. The State of Texas (5th Cir. July 27, 2010). https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16614409628321917592&q=%22sexual+assault+trial+%22+hung+jury&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47

Lafree, G. D., Reskin, B. F., & Visher, C. A. (1985). Jurors' responses to victims' behavior and legal issues in sexual assault trials. Social Problems, 32(4), 389-407. https://doi.org/10.2307/800760

Lonsway, K. A., & Archambault, J. (2012). The "Justice gap" for sexual assault cases. Violence Against Women, 18(2), 145-168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801212440017

Luppi, B., & Parisi, F. (2013). Jury size and the hung-jury paradox. The Journal of Legal Studies, 42(2), 399-422. https://doi.org/10.1086/670692

Narby, D. J., Cutler, B. L., & Moran, G. (1993). A meta-analysis of the association between authoritarianism and jurors' perceptions of defendant culpability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 34-42. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.34

People of the State of Colorado v. Thomas Robert Weiss (Apr. 24, 2006). https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1569518806397355642&q=%22sexual+assault+trial+%22+hung+jury&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47

Rossier, J., Meyer de stadelhofen, F., & Berthoud, S. (2004). The hierarchical structures of the NEO pi-r and the 16 PF 51. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 20(1), 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.20.1.27

Sable, M. R., Danis, F., Mauzy, D. L., & Gallagher, S. K. (2006). Barriers to reporting sexual assault for women and men: Perspectives of college students. Journal of American College Health, 55(3), 157-162. https://doi.org/10.3200/JACH.55.3.157-162

Serving the United States District Court. (n.d.). United States District Court. https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/jurors/jury-handbook#:~:text=Importance%20of%20Jury%20Service,our%20great%20heritage%20of%20freedom.

The State of New Hampshire v. Michael Cannon (June 27, 2001). https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2761426163924239658&q=%22sexual+assault+trial+%22+hung+jury&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47

State of Wisconsin v. Herbert M. Haldemann, Jr. (7th Cir. July 15, 2009). https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16869654849769956689&q=%22sexual+assault+trial+%22+hung+jury&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47

State v. David Lamphere (June 1, 1995). https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15271227251023268133&q=%22sexual+assault+trial+%22+hung+jury&hl=en&as_sdt=6,47

Tripodi, J. A., Hirons, M., Bednall, D., & Sutherland, M. (2003). Cognitive evaluation: Prompts used to measure sponsorship awareness. International Journal of Market Research, 45(4), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1177/147078530304500401

Tupes, E. C., & Christal, R. E. (1992). Recurrent personality factors based on trait ratings. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 225-251. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00973.x



How to Cite

Gudiseva, S., Waxman, E., & Levinson, J. (2023). Juror Personality on Sexual Assault Verdicts Utilizing the Big Five Model. Journal of Student Research, 12(4). https://doi.org/10.47611/jsrhs.v12i4.5231



AP Capstone™ Research