IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orinte/v11y1981i4p67-69.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Management Science and Jury Size: A Commentary

Author

Listed:
  • William V. Gehrlein

    (Department of Business Administration, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware 19711)

Abstract

The analogy of a jury decision is a common one when discussing the Management Science application of quality control. An incoming lot is “innocent” until proven “guilty” by inspection. There are costs for “convicting” a good lot and there are costs for “acquitting” a bad lot. Military standard acceptance sampling tables even allow us the option of using more discriminating sampling plans when the cost of making errors by too frequent “conviction” is high, relative to the converse situation.The general concern of the article is to estimate the impact of reducing jury size from the traditional number of twelve jurors. Some important factors are that in 64.2% of cases with 12 jurors, there is a unanimous vote to convict. Similarly, in 30.3% of these cases there is a unanimous vote to acquit. If jury sizes are reduced, it seems unlikely that any unanimous 12-person jury decision would change. That is, arguments were presented in a trial to convince all 12 jurors to have the same opinion. By reducing the jury size during that trial, there seems to be no reason to expect that remaining jurors would reverse their opinion, with all other things being the same.

Suggested Citation

  • William V. Gehrlein, 1981. "Management Science and Jury Size: A Commentary," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 67-69, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:11:y:1981:i:4:p:67-69
    DOI: 10.1287/inte.11.4.67
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/inte.11.4.67
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/inte.11.4.67?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    judicial/legal: crime;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:11:y:1981:i:4:p:67-69. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.