Janice Burke PhD

Janice Burke PhD

Janice Burke
PhD

Consultant

Janice draws on her expertise in interdisciplinary social psychology and research on cognitive biases to uncover how jurors perceive evidence and make decisions, helping attorneys shape persuasive case strategies.

Clifton Strengths
Learner Achiever Analytical Developer Positivity

Janice Burke

Tell us about your experience.

My experience includes working with several litigation consulting firms on complex civil cases, as well as independently consulting on juvenile criminal matters. I also served as a Research Analyst for the Competency Remediation Project, where I focused on trial competence and legal decision-making in justice-involved youth. Across these roles, I’ve contributed to juror profiling, case theme development, and pre-trial research, bringing a strong foundation in legal psychology and evidence-based research methods to inform case strategies across different stages of litigation.

Tell us about your education background.

I earned my PhD and MA in Interdisciplinary Social Psychology from the University of Nevada, Reno. During my doctoral work, I studied the social and cognitive factors that contribute to wrongful convictions, including eyewitness memory, interrogations, and plea bargaining. I also hold an MS in Forensic Psychology from California State University, Los Angeles, and a BS in Psychology from Sam Houston State University.

What are you known for?

I’m known for pairing strong statistical expertise with a warm, upbeat presence. Colleagues often note my ability to translate complex data into clear, actionable insights while bringing positive, collaborative energy to every project.

What do you do at JurySync?

At JurySync, I work closely with the consulting team to support case strategy through research, analysis, and collaboration. I help ensure each project runs smoothly and contributes meaningful insights, all while keeping the client’s experience thoughtful and responsive. I enjoy being part of a team that values both precision and creativity in every stage of the process.

How did you get in this line of work? What keeps you in it?

I got into this line of work after meeting a man who had been wrongfully convicted—an experience that deeply impacted me and sparked my passion for applying research to real-world legal issues. It opened my eyes to how social science can play a powerful role in promoting fairness and understanding within the justice system. What keeps me in this work is the opportunity to make that impact every day, while constantly learning and adapting in a field that’s as challenging as it is rewarding.

What do you like best about JurySync?

The people I work with—the team is collaborative, knowledgeable, and genuinely supportive. I also appreciate our approach to trial consulting, which delivers incredible insights without overcomplicating the process with statistics that don’t fit the litigation context. It’s a thoughtful balance that makes our work both effective and accessible.

How do you contribute to the success of JurySync clients?

I contribute to the success of JurySync clients by applying my deep understanding of social and cognitive psychology to analyze case dynamics and juror behavior. My background in forensic and interdisciplinary social psychology allows me to provide research-based insights that enhance trial strategy. Beyond my analytical skills, I prioritize clear communication and collaboration to ensure clients feel supported and confident throughout the process.

Where and how did you grow up?

I grew up in a small town just south of Austin, Texas. Being an athlete throughout my childhood helped me develop a strong sense of teamwork, dedication, and resilience. These qualities continue to guide me in both my personal and professional life.

When do you think, “Man, I love what I do”?

I feel most fulfilled when we bring together diverse expertise to overcome tough challenges and find solutions that really make a difference. It’s inspiring to see how teamwork and creative thinking can turn even the most difficult problems into successes.

Publications and Presentations

Yang, Y., Burke, J. L., & Healy, J. (forthcoming). A multi-item signal detection model for eyewitness identification. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications.

Prager, N. W., Giannetta, T. S., Burke, J. L., & Miller, M. K. (2025). Do plea bargains advance justice? A content analysis of judges’ perceptions of plea bargaining. UIC Law Review, 58(4), 899–928. https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview/vol58/iss4/4

Burke, J. L., Healy, J., & Yang, Y. (2024). Reducing biases in the criminal legal system: A perspective from expected utility. Law and Human Behavior, 48(5-6), 356–367. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000571

Summers, A., Marsh, S. C., & Burke, J. L. (2024). Judicial decision-making in juvenile dependency and juvenile justice cases. In M. K. Miller, L. A. Yelderman, M. T. Huss, & J. A. Cantone (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of psychology and legal decision-making (pp. 582–598). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009119375.038

Burke, J. L., Sears, V., Wilford, M. M., & Yang, Y. (2025, March). Analyzing attorneys’ plea recommendations: A theoretical comparison of dominant plea decision-making models. Symposium presented at Annual Meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Burke, J. L., Healy, J., & Yang, Y. (2024, March). Reducing biases in the criminal legal system: A perspective from expected utility. Talk presented at Annual Meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, Los Angeles, California.

Burke, J. L., & Yang, Y. (2023, August). Simultaneous versus sequential lineups: A meta-analysis. Talk presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, Nagoya, Japan.

Burke, J. L., Kruger, S. A., & Yang, Y. (2023, March). Attorney influence in plea bargaining: Factors that impact attorneys’ recommendations. Talk presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Burke, J. L., Kruger, S. A., & Yang, Y. (2022, April). Effects of anchoring and evidence strength on mock attorneys’ plea recommendations. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the Western Psychological Association, Portland, Oregon.

Burke, J. L., Cunius, M. K., & Frenda, S. J. (2021, March). The “Hired Gun”: Compensation and gender of eyewitness experts on juror decision-making. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, Virtual Conference.

See how our team can help you succeed.

From research to strategy to at-trial consulting, JurySync will be your trusted ally in evaluating the case and developing theories and themes that set you up for success.