By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm:
As the Coronavirus spreads, and mock trials are being rescheduled, many courts are restricting operations or shutting down completely, and people are rapidly adapting to a new normal of restricted events and “social distancing.” So, what’s with the run on toilet paper? Partly, you could say it is a rational response to the fact that we might be in our homes for some time, and partly, it is simply because everyone else is doing it and no one wants to be the last one to stock up. But, more broadly, the hoarding could be seen as an attempt to assert a feeling of control in an essentially uncontrollable situation. In other words, in the face of an unknown and potentially terrifying future, we can always look at our toilet paper horde and say, “Well, at least I’m not going to run out of that.”
There is a psychological concept that explains that response: “Terror Management Theory.” It is the idea that, when there are situational factors that remind us of our own vulnerability and risk, and specifically when we are reminded of our own mortality, we will respond in some predictable ways. We will try to manage that terror by clinging more tightly to that which gives us a feeling of endurance and control. We turn to our cultural values, which might include religion, nationalism, or anything else that makes us feel like we’re part of something larger than ourselves. In that way, the salience of personal morality can make us more conservative, in the psychological rather than political sense. So for any jurors still going to court, or for when they eventually do make it back, it is important to think about how the pandemic will change their thinking.
What Is Terror Management Theory?
The idea is based on the writings of Ernest Becker, a cultural anthropologist, and particularly his 1973 Pulitzer Prize winning book, The Denial of Death. An article in the publication The Jury Expert (Lieberman & Arndt, 2009) is many years old at this point, but still does a good job of explaining and citing the foundational research behind Terror Management Theory.
The basic conflict Becker addresses is that we are aware of our own mortality, but also possess a basic animal-like focus on self-preservation. To deal with the resulting conflict, we develop and adhere to complex cultural systems and beliefs in order to manage the terror. The situation, also known as “the human condition,” leads us to turn not just religion, but also to nationalism, or other fundamental beliefs and philosophies out of a desire to be connected to something that lasts. “By living up to the prescriptions of socially sanctioned behavior,” Lieberman and Arndt write, “one can obtain a sense that one’s existence is meaningful and that we are important participants of a larger, and enduring, entity.”We use that to stave off the existential fear of death.
The theory posits that, while the conflict between morality and self-preservation is always present, when we are reminded of it, it becomes more influential in driving our attitudes. The main principle of terror management theory is that when there are cues that push our mortality to the front of our consciousness, like a rapidly advancing global pandemic, for example, that will cause individuals to dig in even more deeply in defense of their belief systems, because those are the only things managing that existential terror. That greater investment leads us to show greater support to those who support our worldview, and to respond more negatively to anyone who might be seen as threatening it.
So the principle is that Momento Mori — the Latin expression of “Remember that you will die” — has some predictable psychological consequences.
How Does Terror Management Influence Jurors?
Terror Management Theory provides a reminder to consider the jurors’ personal context for viewing your case. If something inside or outside of the case touches them as a reminder of their own mortality, then jurors will become more protective and more conservative regarding their own culture, identities, and beliefs. This is an effect that some observed after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks once trials got back into session. They were prone to ‘play it safe’ when it comes to their own values and in-group identities.
Of course, there is a dark side to that tendency: As jurors retreat into their own cherished worldviews, they’re also prone to become more hostile to outsiders and others who are different. In sentencing or awarding damages, they may become more favorable to those similar to them and more punitive to those who are not. Researchers have also observed a tendency for those who have been reminded of their own mortality to become more authoritarian, in the sense of becoming more focused on rule-following and order. There is an enhanced concern for fair process and for following the law and the instructions. People are also more likely to think in stereotypical ways regarding others. As if we are conserving our mental resources as well, it gets a little easier to trust our snap judgments.
This process is not necessarily conscious, and people are not necessarily aware that their focus on their own mortality is influencing them in these ways, so it doesn’t work to simply ask people in voir dire if they think that recent events have influenced their views. Instead, it is better to ask about attitudes. Terror management doesn’t involve a new set of beliefs. Rather, these reminders of our vulnerability just serve to add energy to our existing cultural views. So, the advice is to use whatever jury selection tools that are available to find out about these views, knowing that in times of crisis, they will be even more strongly committed and reluctant to set them aside.
______
Other Posts on Fear Responses:
- Understand Why Fear (Often, not Always) Persuades
- Address Fearful Conservatives and Angry Liberals
- Know What Scares (the Top Five Fears)
- Expect Fear to be Driven by Dread, Not Data