When faced with a jury that claims it is deadlocked, what is the test for asking for further deliberations?

When faced with a jury that claims it is deadlocked, "'a court must do more than figuratively throw up its hands and tell the jury it cannot help. It must at least consider how it can best aid the jury.' [Citation.]" (People v. Young (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 1165, 1171-1172, italics omitted.) As long as the trial court avoids coercing the jury to reach a verdict, there is no bar against inquiring into the possibility of agreement, nor is it improper to suggest further deliberations. (People v. Bell (2007) 40 Cal.4th 582, 616.) The court must reasonably conclude, however, that any directions for further deliberations "would be perceived '"'as a means of enabling the jurors to enhance their understanding of the case rather than as mere pressure to reach a verdict on the basis of matters already discussed and considered.'"'" (Ibid.)

2. Background