“…A number of characteristics make a jury study more or less naturalistic: a rich trial stimulus, real-world dependent measures (e.g., a dichotomous verdict), applicable jury instructions, group deliberation, consequentiality (i.e., a decision with real consequences for the affected parties), and a diverse sample of mock jurors. Previous research has addressed the relationship between many of these methodological variables and mock jurors’ verdicts, but without much in the way of conclusive results (for review, see Bornstein, 1999; Bornstein & McCabe, 2005; Devine, Clayton, Dunford, Seying, & Pryce, 2001; Diamond, 1997; Kovera, 2017; Nietzel, McCarthy, & Kerr, 1999). A high degree of verisimilitude might look better, especially to judges, lawyers, and other policymakers, but it is still unclear whether, and to what extent, it affects the integrity of the research findings.…”