¶ … American legal system is that a person innocent of a crime he or she may be accused of until proven guilty by a jury of peers. This means that the mutual decision of a jury had innumerous affects on both an individual and society. Based on this, it is clear that all aspects of how and why a jury makes decisions should be examined. An area that is particularly important is the presentation of evidence and its affect how a jury's verdict. More specifically, how does the presentation of DNA evidence affect the verdict in a trial? To find an answer to this particular question, it is possible to set up an experiment that will mimic a court case with the presence of DNA evidence. Some metholodgical questions are:

Why is an experiment the best choice to answer this question, and what are its drawbacks?

How should the dependent variable be controlled?

Who are the subjects and how should...

Participant observation would be impossible in this scenario because there is no way for a researcher to take part in a jury that has all of the necessary parameters, unless he or she takes part in a fake trial. If the researcher takes part in a fake trial, then the method becomes more experimental than observational. If one was working with limited resources, a case study could be used, but it would be difficult to guarantee that the true reason for a jury's decision was based on the presentation of the DNA evidence. In an experiment, the researcher could present subjects with a "court transcript" that varies only in the presentation of the DNA evidence. Additionally, an experiment would provide facts that could be useful…