Science Explorer Back to mapMap
Discussion
Topic · Law

Jury Decision Making Processes

Jury Decision Making Processes is a research topic within Law. Science Explorer counts 6.1k research works in it since 1950. 10.1% of them reached the world's top 10% most cited for their field and year.

This cluster of papers explores various aspects of jury decision making in legal proceedings, including the impact of evidence law, reasonable doubt, juror comprehension, and judicial instructions on both criminal trials and civil litigation. It also delves into the role of lay participation in the legal process.

  • Jury
  • Decision Making
  • Legal Proceedings
  • Evidence Law
  • Reasonable Doubt
  • Juror Comprehension
  • Judicial Instructions
  • Criminal Trials
  • Civil Litigation
  • Lay Participation
Research works
6.1k
fractional, since 1950
In the world top 10%
621
per year above
Top-10% rate
10.1%
share of its works in the world top 10%
Growth, 2018-21 → 2022-25
+7%
the tick is no change
Largest producer
United States
40% of the 10 largest, 2022-now
Jury Decision Making Processes

Which countries lead Jury Decision Making Processes research?

By volume, the United States and Russia publish the most (248 and 75 works in 2022-now).

By volume, 2022-now

  1. 1 United States 248 works
  2. 2 Russia 75 works
  3. 3 United Kingdom 67 works
  4. 4 Australia 47 works
  5. 5 China 46 works
  6. 6 India 30 works
  7. 7 Poland 28 works
  8. 8 France 26 works
  9. 9 Italy 25 works
  10. 10 Canada 24 works

How concentrated that is

The same countries as shares of everything the list above accounts for. A node where two countries do two thirds of the work and one spread evenly across twelve read alike as a ranking and not at all alike here.

United States: 40.2%Russia: 12.2%United Kingdom: 10.8%Australia: 7.7%6 others listed: 29.1%40%largest
United States248 · 40.2%Russia75 · 12.2%United Kingdom67 · 10.8%Australia47 · 7.7%6 others listed180 · 29.1%

Shares of the rows listed above, not of the whole node.

Which institutions lead Jury Decision Making Processes research?

By volume in 2022-now, Monash University publishes the most Jury Decision Making Processes research, followed by University of New England and Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.

By volume, 2022-now

  1. 1 Monash UniversityAustralia 9 works
  2. 2 University of New EnglandAustralia 7 works
  3. 3 Centre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueFrance 6 works
  4. 4 Kutafin Moscow State Law UniversityRussia 6 works
  5. 5 Jagiellonian UniversityPoland 6 works
  6. 6 Weatherford CollegeUnited States 6 works
  7. 7 Cornell UniversityUnited States 6 works
  8. 8 University of MichiganUnited States 6 works
  9. 9 London School of Economics and Political ScienceUnited Kingdom 5 works
  10. 10 Ştefan cel Mare Police AcademyMoldova 5 works

Who are the leading researchers in Jury Decision Making Processes?

The most-cited researchers publishing on Jury Decision Making Processes include Daniel J. Kahneman and Richard E. Petty.

  1. 1 Daniel J. Kahneman United States 395k citations
  2. 2 Richard E. Petty United States 106k citations

Ranked by citations received across their whole record, among researchers with at least three works on this topic.

What are the most cited papers in Jury Decision Making Processes?

The most cited paper in Jury Decision Making Processes is "The base-rate fallacy in probability judgments" (Maya Bar‐Hillel, 1980), with 1,204 citations. Next come "The Psychology of Criminal Conduct" (909) and "Voice, control, and procedural justice: Instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments." (787).

Most cited papers
#PaperReleasedCitations
1 The base-rate fallacy in probability judgments Maya Bar‐Hillel · Acta Psychologica May 1980 1,204
2 The Psychology of Criminal Conduct David S. Nussbaum · Canadian Journal of Criminology Oct 1999 909
3 Voice, control, and procedural justice: Instrumental and noninstrumental concerns in fairness judgments. E. Allan Lind, Ruth Kanfer, P. Christopher Earley · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Open access Nov 1990 787
4 The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Brian H. Bornstein · Law and Human Behavior Feb 1999 695
5 Public trust and confidence in legal authorities: What do majority and minority group members want from the law and legal institutions?* Tom R. Tyler · Behavioral Sciences & the Law Mar 2001 621
All 99 most cited papers, with filters and sorting

Where is Jury Decision Making Processes research done?

The largest centres of Jury Decision Making Processes research in 2022-now are Moscow (Russia), New York (United States), London (United Kingdom) and Beijing (China). Among places with at least 20 works in it, it is an unusually large share of all research in Moscow.

Largest cities, 2022-now

  1. 1 MoscowRussia 31 works
  2. 2 New YorkUnited States 18 works
  3. 3 LondonUnited Kingdom 18 works
  4. 4 BeijingChina 14 works
  5. 5 MelbourneAustralia 13 works
  6. 6 Washington D.C.United States 10 works
  7. 7 ParisFrance 10 works
  8. 8 ChicagoUnited States 8 works
  9. 9 SydneyAustralia 8 works
  10. 10 ChisinauMoldova 7 works

Where it is the local speciality

  1. MoscowRU · 31.0 works3.3×
← less than its size predicts1×more →

Location quotient: how much more of its research is in Jury Decision Making Processes than the world average.

See Jury Decision Making Processes on the map

Where is the best place to study Jury Decision Making Processes?

Among universities, judged by research, Monash University score highest, combining excellence, specialisation, size, growth and international reach. Research strength is one signal when choosing where to study; it does not measure teaching.

Excellenceshare of its work in the world top 10%, 2022-now and all time averaged
40%
Specialisationhow much of its work is in this field, counted up to 10× the world share
10%
Sizeits output in this field, on a log scale
30%
Growthoutput growth, counted from -20% to +20%
10%
Internationalshare of its work with a co-author abroad
10%
Each slider sets a weight; the share it gets of the score is beside it.
#UniversityScoreTop 10%SpecialisationWorksGrowth
1Monash UniversityAustralia 10.00.8%12.0×9 +52.3%

Universities only. The score blends excellence (40%), size (30%), specialisation (10%), growth (10%), international reach (10%), 2022-now; growth compares 2018-21 with 2022-25 and counts up to +20%, since a jump from a small base is mostly noise.

Every institution in Jury Decision Making Processes, country by country

Is Jury Decision Making Processes research growing?

Output in 2022-2025 was 7% higher than in 2018-2021, peaking in 2025. The fastest-growing topics are Jury Decision Making Processes.

still counting19801990200020102020
grewheldshrank

The same series as a ribbon: one cell per year, darker for more. The line above answers how much; this answers when.

Its share of all research

Growing output can still be a shrinking share: all of science grows. This is Jury Decision Making Processes as a percentage of every work published that year, 0.0033% in 2024.

still counting0.0050%0.010%0.015%Jury Decision Making Processes0.0043% in 202519801990200020102020

Fractional works of Jury Decision Making Processes over all fractional works that year. How the balance of science has shifted.

How much of it reaches the world top 10%

Year by year.

still counting5%10%15%Jury Decision Making Processes10.8% in 2025200020102020

Of each year's works in it, the share that reached the world's 10% most cited for their field and year. A field is the world for its own topics, so there is no other line to hold it against.

Which topics inside it are moving

Growth and decline on one axis around a shared zero. Two lists side by side hide the thing that matters: whether the growth dwarfs the decline, or the other way round.

Discussion

Ask a question or share a note about Jury Decision Making Processes. Posts are plain text and can be reported.