OBJECTIVE To inform policies and practices that reflect the values and expectations of the communities that judges serve, we fielded a national survey of public perceptions regarding judicial roles and factors that could be considered in decision making. HYPOTHESES We had four questions: (1) What is public opinion on the importance of various judicial roles and considerations? (2) Can distinct groups of respondents be identified on the basis of their views? (3) Do the groups differ in terms of their sociodemographic characteristics and beliefs? (4) If so, can they be distinguished by their characteristics and beliefs? METHOD We surveyed 4,861 jury-eligible adults through Qualtrics Online Panels. About half identified as men, and about two thirds as White; the mean age was 45 years. Respondents rated the importance of judicial responsibilities and considerations using 10 items adapted from a survey of trial court judges. We employed latent profile analysis to identify subgroups on the basis of their ratings and conducted univariate and multivariable analyses to examine differences across sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS A four-group model was the best-fitting and most interpretable solution. The largest profile (47.4%) demonstrated the highest ratings, suggesting that they valued due process, legal standards, expert knowledge, public safety, helping the accused, and community input. The second largest profile (39.5%) also valued legal standards, expert knowledge, and public safety but not public interests and community input. The next group (7.8%) generally rated all items as neither important nor unimportant, suggesting an ambivalence, lack of opinion, or limited interest in the issues. The smallest group (5.4%) rated all items as unimportant. CONCLUSIONS Findings highlight areas of consensus and divergence and reveal distinct opinion profiles that can inform policy and practice. They also support the use of sophisticated measurement and analytic approaches that go beyond descriptive examinations of a single item or index to assess public opinion. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

公众对司法角色和考虑因素的看法：潜在概况分析。


目的 为了制定反映法官所服务社区的价值观和期望的政策和实践，我们对公众对司法角色和决策中可以考虑的因素的看法进行了一项全国性调查。假设 我们有四个问题： （1） 公众对各种司法角色和考虑因素的重要性的看法如何？（2） 是否可以根据受访者的观点确定不同的受访者群体？（3） 这些群体的社会人口特征和信仰是否不同？（4） 如果是这样，他们可以通过他们的特征和信仰来区分吗？方法 我们通过 Qualtrics 在线小组调查了 4,861 名符合陪审团资格的成年人。大约一半是男性，大约三分之二是白人;平均年龄为 45 岁。受访者使用改编自初审法院法官调查的 10 个项目对司法责任和考虑因素的重要性进行评分。我们采用潜在概况分析根据亚组的评级确定亚组，并进行单变量和多变量分析以检查社会人口学特征的差异。结果 四组模型是最佳拟合和最易解释的解决方案。最大的个人资料 （47.4%） 表现出最高的评分，这表明他们重视正当程序、法律标准、专业知识、公共安全、帮助被告和社区意见。第二大受访者 （39.5%） 还重视法律标准、专业知识和公共安全，但不重视公共利益和社区意见。下一组 （7.8%） 通常将所有项目评为既不重要也不不重要，这表明存在矛盾心理、缺乏意见或对这些问题的兴趣有限。最小的组 （5.4%） 将所有项目评为不重要。 结论 研究结果突出了共识和分歧的领域，并揭示了可以为政策和实践提供信息的不同观点概况。它们还支持使用复杂的测量和分析方法，这些方法超越了对单个项目或指数的描述性检查来评估公众舆论。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 （c） 2025 APA，保留所有权利）。