It has been shown to influence the decision making of police, prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges, and juries, leading to higher conviction rates and harsher punishments for racial minorities. Some lawyers, judges, and other advocates for racial justice believe that informing juries about the harmful nature of bias and asking them to avoid letting bias influence their judgement can reduce the prevalence of disparate outcomes.

However, the use of implicit bias jury instructions remains a highly controversial topic. It is unclear whether such instructions are effective and if so, which types of instructions are the most likely to yield more equitable outcomes. Some argue that the instructions are a constitutional violation if they explicitly refer to race, some argue they can harm white parties in a case, while others argue such instructions may backfire and increase negative bias toward racial minorities involved in a case. In a series of randomized experiments, I empirically examine how alternative types of implicit bias jury instructions influence juror perceptions, case outcomes, and the jury decision making process.