| This study investigates the possibility of discriminating between jurors who are prone to choose a verdict for plaintiffs in civil tort cases from those prone to choose a verdict for defendants based upon certain pretrial characteristics (gender, personality traits, and level of moral reasoning). It extends the work of Moran and Comfort and of Penrod, who proposed the possibility of significant relationships between these and other situational variables and verdict choice.; In this study, 180 participants from a population of eligible jurors completed a short demographic survey, the NEO-FFI personality inventory, and the DIT-2 (Defining Issues Test) moral reasoning test to give the researcher a characteristic profile of each juror. The participants were then presented with a live courtroom-type presentation out of a series of actual civil tort cases and, subsequently, asked to make a verdict choice for either the plaintiff or defendant prior to the mock jury group discussion.; Findings indicated that personality traits as measured by the NEO-FFI and moral reasoning level as measured by the Defining Issues Test (DIT-2) did not significantly predict the predeliberation vote of the research jurors. |
