Study Finds Legal Jargon Boosts Guilty Verdicts, Erodes Public Trust

Jurors who struggle with complex legal terminology are more likely to convict, while feeling less confident in the judicial process.

Mar. 19, 2026 at 9:10am

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A new study from the University of Florida found that jurors presented with complex legal jargon during trials are more likely to vote guilty, while also feeling less confident in their own performance and the overall fairness of the judicial system. The research suggests that using simpler, more accessible language in courtrooms could improve impartiality and public trust.

Why it matters

The findings raise concerns about the impact of overly technical legal language on the integrity of jury trials and the public's perception of the justice system. If jurors are more prone to convict due to cognitive strain from complex terminology, it could undermine the principles of a fair and impartial trial.

The details

The study, led by Professor Olivia Bullock, involved an experiment where over 1,000 participants were asked to imagine serving on a jury. Half were shown testimony with common legal jargon, while the other half saw the same information translated into simpler language. Bullock found that the jargon-heavy transcripts reduced participants' "processing fluency" - the ease of handling new information. This state of uncertainty led to more guilty verdicts, as well as lower confidence in their own performance and the judicial process overall.

  • The study was published on March 15, 2026 in the Journal of Applied Communication Research.

The players

Olivia Bullock

A professor in the University of Florida's College of Journalism and Communications who led the study on the psychological effects of legal jargon on jurors.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“When jurors are struggling to process legal language, they vote guilty more often. If the outcome that's desired is impartiality and fairness, then using plain language throughout the process is the way to go.”

— Olivia Bullock, Professor

What’s next

Bullock suggests that courts could take steps to improve accessibility, such as providing glossaries of technical terms or preparing plain language summaries of expert testimony.

The takeaway

This study highlights how the use of complex legal jargon in courtrooms can undermine the fairness and integrity of jury trials, leading to more guilty verdicts and eroding public trust in the judicial system. Adopting clearer, more accessible language could help address these issues and uphold the principles of impartial justice.