Chuck Blanchard has a piece up on his blog about some recently published research that shows that diversity in the juror pool leads to greater accuracy in determining guilt or innocence:
“In all, Sommers’ data show that diverse juries reason better, not just as groups but as individuals; everyone on the jury benefits, and justice, it appears, is better served. As Sommers concludes, these results make the benefits of diverse juries not just more concrete but readily attained. Minority jurors need feel no burden or need to ‘educate’ white jurors or convey a unique minority perspective; diversity seems to do its own work. The results suggest that representative juries do not merely honor a civil right or a constitutional ideal but provide an effective tool for achieving more thorough and competent jury deliberations.”
I would add that there are probably theological implications for those of us who think that a broadly diverse (catholic) expression of Christianity is the best. It’s well known in bio-systems study that the more diverse an eco-system the more resilient it is to crisis.
Now we have this study that the more diverse an assembled group is, the more accurately it can inoculate itself against prejudicial views that keep it from arriving at truth.
Both of these together, plus what little I know about economics and market theory make me wonder if reality isn’t designed in such a way as to “favor” diversity over mono-culture.
Interesting thing to speculate on. Can y’all think of any other examples?
Read the rest here: Empirical Evidence That Diversity Matters
(Via A Guy in the Pew.)