As I write this, a crowd of Trump supporters is entering the BOK Center in Tulsa, Oklahoma, to attend the President’s first mid-pandemic rally. In other parts of the country, and at opposite ends of the political spectrum, large groups continue gathering to protest racial bias in policing. In both cases, attendees are playing down the advice of medical professionals to avoid large groups of people. The same could be said of the many out shopping and visiting local attractions. After close to four months of lockdowns brought about by the coronavirus, and even as the infection numbers are remaining high and spiking in some places, people are growing tired of staying in place and are deciding to move back toward normal.

Concern over the virus varies, based not just where you sit on the political spectrum, but based on where you live, literally. In a recent analysis of one of our own Persuasion Strategies Big Jury surveys, we found that the population density of individuals’ communities — in other words, whether they live in an urban, suburban, or rural area — influences their reported willingness to show up for jury duty in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic. This suggests that population density has a direct influence on the shape of turn-out once courts start opening up. In this post, I will share that data and discuss its implications.

The Research: Population Density Determines Juror Willingness

We started the study this past spring, and will continue to look at the way the attitudes of the jury-eligible population shift in response to the changing times. For this analysis, we used zip code data to match it with population density data to see if it made a difference with respect to willingness to report for jury duty. It turned out to make a difference that is both substantial and statistically significant.

We asked respondents whether they would or wouldn’t show up for jury duty if called, and below are the numbers for those answering “No.” The greater the density, the greater the resistance.

We also asked our research participants about what they would expect of others in their community, a measure that has been found to be, in some ways, better than asking about their own behavior (because externalizing the question reduces the “social desirability bias” in giving the correct answer for themselves). Applying that to jury duty, the difference is even larger: greater avoidance in urban areas, less avoidance in rural areas.

Implications

The implications of population density could be felt in a few ways.

Depending on Your Venue, Your Trial Might Actually Go Forward

For many of my clients, it has been difficult to tell the difference between courts that are truly going forward with trial dates, and courts that are “date bluffing” (essentially saying, “I’m not going to take the pressure off by kicking this case into the indefinite future, because I think it should settle now”). It is important that a substantial number in all of the regions, more than one in five, say that they would not report for jury duty. However, as the lockdowns wear out their welcome, some parts of the country are starting to look astonishingly normal. The pattern could certainly change, especially if the virus starts to affect rural areas with less hospital capacity. But for now, rural areas could be more likely to restart their activities, including court dates, while urban areas could take a little longer.

When Your Trial Does Go Forward, Your Jury Pool Will Look Different

Naturally, those who say they would not report for jury duty are not a neutral cross-section of the population. They are different. Those who say they would definitely comply with a jury summons and attend jury service are more likely to:

• • • • Be unaffected by the recent economic downturn
      • Have voted for Trump
      • Believe others generally act fairly
      • Trust that government bodies and corporations will respond appropriately to COVID

In our experience, these factors are consistently linked to pro-corporate predispositions in trials involving corporate defendants. Another recent survey revealed similar results, with researchers concluding jurors likely to attend and serve in a three-week trial are:

• • • • More likely to be conservative
      • Less likely to report a ‘fair’ or ‘poor’ financial condition since the pandemic began
      • Less likely to have changed their behaviors since the pandemic began

So in the near term, when planning your strategy and case messages for in-person jury trials, bear in mind that you are not just adapting to the venue, you are adapting to the willing.

____________________

Image Credit: 123rf.com, used under license