By Nikoleta Despodova
Photo credit Alyssa Sieb
Modern jurors are impacted by a bevy of attitudes, experiences and biases which affect their decision-making in the courtroom. One such worldview that influences juror perspectives is locus of control (LOC). LOC describes an individual’s perception about the causation of events in their lives. Jurors can generally fall into two categories: those with an internal locus of control and those with an external locus of control. Attorneys and trial consultants who recognize these traits are better equipped to tailor their case presentations effectively. Increasingly, social media serves as a goldmine for assessing these psychological nuances.
The Basics of Locus of Control: Internal vs. External
Individuals who exhibit an internal locus of control fundamentally believe their successes and failures result from personal effort, choices, and discipline. Such jurors are likely to scrutinize the specific decisions made by plaintiffs and defendants carefully, emphasizing personal responsibility and individual accountability. They may critically evaluate whether parties involved acted responsibly, negligently, or recklessly.
Alternatively, jurors with an external locus of control perceive outcomes as shaped primarily by forces outside their personal influence such as fate, luck, systemic biases, or environmental circumstances. These jurors often focus less on individual choice and more on context, societal forces, or external pressures influencing actions. They might sympathize with parties who appear disadvantaged by systemic issues, chance, or uncontrollable events.
By accurately identifying a juror’s LOC, attorneys gain a strategic advantage in aligning their narratives with the psychological predispositions of jurors. Doing so often involves delving into their social media presence, where several indicators can help identify whether a given juror has an internal or external locus of control.
Social Media: The New Frontier in Juror Profiling
Social media has dramatically altered jury selection dynamics by providing unique insights into jurors’ psychological tendencies and decision-making styles, including LOC. The content jurors share publicly on social media, whether it be personal experiences, opinions, or reactions to news and events, can reveal crucial information about their LOC. However, not all social media content is equally revealing. Effective profiling hinges on pinpointing specific indicators rather than generalizing from ambiguous or superficial content.
When examining social media content to discern locus of control, precision matters. A broad overview, such as noting a juror’s frequent posting about family activities, does not necessarily illuminate their internal or external locus clearly. Rather, specific posts reflecting attitudes about responsibility, personal effort, external influence, or systemic fairness provide the most actionable insights.
For instance, a juror who posts statements like, “Worked hard, finally earned that promotion,” or “Determination is key to overcoming challenges,” demonstrates an internal locus of control. whereas, expressions like “Once again, the system is stacked against the average person” or “Some people just catch all the breaks” strongly indicate an external locus.
A particularly intriguing subset of jurors, whose social media profiles predominantly feature family-related content, demands deeper examination. At first glance, posts about family events, milestones, and vacations might seem innocuous, providing limited actionable intelligence. But careful interpretation of these family-oriented posts can yield nuanced insights into jurors’ psychological tendencies and decision-making orientations.
Understanding Family-Centric Social Media Content
Family-oriented jurors often place significant emphasis on interpersonal relationships, communal harmony, and emotional connections. Social media posts featuring family milestones like graduations, weddings, birthdays, or achievements (“Proud of my kids’ academic accomplishments!”) might initially suggest internal LOC. The juror attributes positive outcomes to dedicated parenting or intentional decisions about their family’s development, thus reflecting a belief in personal responsibility and internal control.
However, other family-related content may imply external LOC tendencies. Expressions of gratitude for good fortune (“Feeling blessed we could all get together this holiday”) or acknowledging circumstances beyond their control (“Thankful everyone stayed healthy despite everything going on”) indicate recognition of external influences.
As a result,
family-oriented jurors often display a balanced or blended LOC. Their strong family focus may reflect deeply internal beliefs about nurturing, dedication, and personal responsibility. Simultaneously, they may also recognize the role of external factors, such as societal support, community safety, or economic conditions, which significantly influence family outcomes.
This balanced locus of control often positions family-oriented jurors uniquely in jury deliberations. They tend to carefully evaluate personal accountability while remaining open to external contextual arguments. Unlike purely internal jurors who rigidly adhere to standards of personal responsibility or purely external jurors who predominantly view individuals as victims of circumstance, these jurors can weigh both perspectives more judiciously.
While family-oriented jurors can offer balanced perspectives, there is a notable risk of confirmation bias. These jurors may project their personal familial experiences or values onto the evidence, potentially skewing their impartiality. For example, they might judge parental behavior harshly if it conflicts with their own parenting standards or sympathize excessively with plaintiffs or defendants whose familial situations mirror their own. Attorneys must be aware of such potential biases to effectively address or mitigate them during trial presentations.
Beyond Locus of Control: Complementary Insights from Social Media
While LOC remains a central psychological construct, complementary psychological insights derived from social media can enrich juror profiles significantly. Attorneys benefit from understanding jurors’ political orientations, attitudes toward authority, emotional responsiveness, past personal experiences relevant to case topics, and evident biases towards certain demographics or groups. These attitudes often meaningfully interact with LOC as well.
Political affiliations or ideological leanings disclosed via social media can offer value regarding jurors’ predispositions toward particular case themes, such as corporate accountability, government responsibility, or law enforcement credibility. For example, a juror with strong anti-corporate attitudes coupled with an external locus of control may be strongly in favor of punishing a corporate actor who has created an unsafe environment for a given plaintiff.
Similarly, posts indicating a high degree of trust or skepticism toward authority figures, such as law enforcement or corporate executives, can suggest inclinations in criminal trials or liability cases. A juror with an internal locus of control might be a more harsh critic of an authority figure’s decisions when they have generally shown anti-authoritarian beliefs.
Practical Recommendations for Trial Consultants
To utilize social media analysis effectively, trial consultants should systematically categorize jurors’ posts by their clear indicators of LOC and other psychological traits. Reporting specific quotes or behaviors is more valuable than vague descriptions (e.g., “majority family-related posts”). Precise characterization allows attorneys to anticipate jurors’ reactions and strategically tailor arguments.
For family-oriented jurors specifically, consultants should look for balanced LOC indicators and assess emotional triggers evident in family-focused posts. Recognizing when and how these jurors might shift their positions under persuasive arguments ensures more nuanced jury selection and trial strategy.
While social media profiling is beneficial, ethical practice is paramount. Consultants must remain mindful of privacy laws, ethical guidelines, and boundaries set by professional associations. Notably, accessing private or protected social media content without consent is generally unethical or even unlawful. Analysis should rely strictly on publicly available information.
Furthermore, interpretations drawn from social media data must avoid unwarranted generalizations or stereotypical assumptions. Social media snapshots represent partial and selective insights into jurors’ psychological landscapes. Attorneys and consultants must balance social media-derived insights with other voir dire and demographic data.
Social media offers unprecedented access to juror psychology, particularly concerning locus of control. The key to harnessing this resource effectively lies in precise, nuanced interpretation rather than superficial summaries. Understanding the complexities of jurors can provide decisive strategic advantages. Ultimately, attorneys and consultants who invest in juror profiling through social media can dramatically enhance their ability to shape persuasive, targeted trial strategies.