Jurors go through a lot in performing what is a pretty thankless task, and I would imagine that courts and legislatures will think long and hard before adopting

Jurors go through a lot in performing what is a pretty thankless task, and I would imagine that courts and legislatures will think long and hard before adopting any system by which they add the further burden of making jurors undergo psychological tests as a condition of being chosen. Such a system, if used on a jury pool in any systematic way, would prove incredibly burdensome because, as anyone who has served knows, the pool itself is many times larger than the number selected. Even as it is today, jurors will sit around for a whole day, or even for several days, undergoing the selection process - I can't imagine what this would be like if they had to be individually tested for their emotional qualities as well. Perhaps this can work for exceptional cases only and be made subject to the discretion of a judge in individual cases. Of course, if adopted for any case on the ground that science requires it for fairness, then the failure to use it in other cases may create due-process grounds for appeal whenever a defendant is convicted without benefit of the full range of protections available for the jury selection process. My guess is that this study is too thin in itself to lead to changes in the procedures, especially because of the practical burdens that would result if its findings are accepted as established scientific fact. A lot more study would be required before so fundamental a change would be made.