Effects of Victim,Defendant, and Juror Gender on Decisions in Child Sexual Assault Cases1

We examined the combined influence of juror, victim, and defendant gender on jurors’ decisions in child sexual abuse cases. Mock jurors read scenarios of an assault case involving a man or woman defendant accused of molesting a 15‐year‐old boy or girl. Jurors then rendered verdicts and rated the defendant's and victim's believability and responsibility for the abuse. Female jurors were generally more pro‐victim in case judgments than were male jurors. Additionally, a woman perpetrator was evaluated more leniently than was a man perpetrator, especially by male jurors when the victim was a boy. Case judgments were unrelated to jurors’ social conservatism, sexism, or attitudes toward homosexuality. Results have implications for understanding social perceptions of mixed‐ and same‐gender abuse involving adolescent victims, and juror decision making in man‐ and woman‐perpetrated child sexual assault cases.     

The role of observer attitudes in judgments of blame in cases of wife assault

This study examines the importance of observer characteristics in determining blame in cases of wife assault. Four independent variables (observer's attitudes toward sex roles, observer sex and age, and victim behavior) were assessed for their influence on the blaming judgments of 128 participants. Subjects completed a questionnaire that contained demographic items and six wife assault vignettes that varied in level of victim provocation (low or high). Questions about blame of the husband and wife followed each vignette. An attitudes toward women scale (AWS-B) was then administered. The main hypothesis, that subjects with traditional attitudes would blame the victim more and the perpetrator less for the assault than their egalitarian counterparts, was supported, as was the prediction of an interaction between provocation and AWS-B. The results are discussed in light of the role of observer attitudes in attribution models.     

Improving the Credibility of Child Sexual Assault Victims in Court: The Impact of a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner

The present study investigated the influence of a sexual assault nurse examiner's (SANE's) testimony on mock juror perceptions of a child or adolescent victim of child sexual assault. Community members (N = 252, 156 females) read a fictional criminal trial summary of a child sexual assault case in which the victim was 6 or 15 years old and the prosecution presented medical testimony from a SANE or a traditional registered nurse (RN), or did not present medical testimony. Mock jurors were more likely to render guilty verdicts when a SANE testified compared with the other two testimony conditions. In addition, pro-victim judgments (e.g., sympathy toward the victim) and negative defendant judgments (e.g., anger toward the defendant) mediated this relation. Finally, cognitive network representations of the case demonstrated that the RN and no-medical-testimony groups were similar and the SANE group was distinct from the other two conditions. We discuss these results in terms of the implications of SANE testimony in child sexual assault court cases. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Can happy mood reduce the just world bias? Affective influences on blaming the victim

Do temporary moods influence people's tendency to blame victims for undeserved negative events? Based on research on the just world effect and recent affect theories, this experiment predicted and found that positive mood decreased and negative mood increased people's motivation to blame innocent victims for their misadventures. Participants (N = 70) were induced into positive or negative mood by viewing films, and subsequently read a newspaper article describing a random assault on either a fellow student (in-group member) or a corporate employee (out-group member). Their reactions were assessed on three measures: attributions of responsibility, dissociation from the victim and character evaluations. Positive mood reduced and negative mood increased the tendency to blame the victim, and in-group victims were blamed more than out-group victims. These results are discussed in terms of recent theories of affect and motivation, and their implications for real-life social judgments are considered.     

“Because I Love You …” The Tactical Use of Attributional Expressions in Conversation

While attributional processes are traditionally regarded as intrapersonal phenomena, attributional statements are a common feature of interpersonal communication. This study sought to explore the nature of attributions that are used tactically in conversation. Among other tasks, participants were asked to describe conversations in which causal statements had been posited for some “ulterior” purpose—perhaps to evoke an emotion, obtain a behavior, or receive some sort of compliment. Results revealed that the most commonly cited tactical attributions included excuses, justifications, and affiliation moves. Nontactical attributions, in contrast, rarely included affiliation moves. Attributions that were used tactically also tended to focus more frequently on positive events, behaviors, or qualities and tended to emphasize interpersonal, stable sources more often than nontactical attributions. The most frequently perceived goal for tactical attributions was to obtain an object or behavior. Implications for an extension of the literature on accounts are discussed.     

Matters of Life and Death: Justice in Judgments of Wrongful Death1

Two experiments investigated the influence of social categories on mock juror judgments of wrongful death compensatory damages. The research also examined whether these cues—decedent race, parental status, age, and socioeconomic status—differentially affected noneconomic and economic awards and, further, the extent to which jurors' distributive justice concerns could explain the findings. Results revealed a decedent's parental status to consistently impact noneconomic awards; whereas his parental status, age, and socioeconomic status all consistently affected economic awards. Decedent race did not inform participants' judgments. These results were in close alignment with the values participants expressed (Study 2) regarding the use of social categories in compensatory damage awards. Overall, the pattern of findings supports a distributive justice account.     

General And Culturally Specific Factors Influencing Black And White Rape Survivors' Self-Esteem

Grounded in a culturally inclusive ecological model of sexual assault recovery framework, the influence of personal (e.g., prior victimization), rape context (e.g., degree of injury during last assault), and postrape response factors (e.g., general and cultural attributions, rape related coping) on self-esteem of Black and White college women, who were survivors of attempted and completed rape, were examined. As predicted, Black and White women identified similar general variables (e.g., general attributions) as important in the recovery process. Black women, however, identified a cultural factor (i.e., cultural attributions) as more important in influencing their reactions to the last rape compared to their White counterparts. Using path analysis, findings from this cross-sectional study indicated that severity of the last assault and prior victimization were related to lower self-esteem indirectly through avoidance coping strategies, and victim blame attributions for the latter. Results also suggested that the link between cultural attributions and self-esteem was explained through victim blame attributions, primarily for Black participants. The model accounted for 26% of variance in self-esteem.     

The Effects of Physical Attractiveness,Race, Socioeconomic Status,and Gender of Defendants and Victims on Judgments of Mock Jurors: A Meta-Analysis1

A meta-analysis of experimental research on mock juror judgments was conducted to assess the effects of physical attractiveness, race, socioeconomic status (SES), and gender of both defendants and victims to test the theory that jurors use characteristics that are correlated with criminal behavior as cues to infer guilt and to recommend punishment. In general, it was advantageous for defendants to be physically attractive, female, and of high SES, although these advantages were nil for some crimes. There were no overall effects of race on mock jurors' judgments, but the effect of defendant race on punishment was strongly moderated by type of crime. Effects of victim characteristics on jurors' judgments were generally inconsequential, although defendants were at a disadvantage when the victim was female.     

The Social Construction of “What's Fair” at Work1

This paper examines how the public views an act of discrimination as a consequence of the social context in which the injustice occurs and as a function of how the victim rcsponds. Results indicate that a context that offers grievance procedures to workers who feel unjustly treated enhances the public's perception of injustice if the victim decides not to file a grievance or if the victim files a grievance and wins. The victim who loses her or his claim is derogated and the act of discrimination justified. Implications for policy and public opinion on sex and race discrimination cases are examined.     

“Everybody feels a broken bone,but only we can feel a broken heart”: Group membership influences the perception of targets' suffering

There is surmounting evidence in the literature demonstrating that social pain (e.g. rejection, humiliation, and isolation) and physical pain (e.g. injury or assault) overlap in personal experiences. The present investigation focuses on second‐hand perceptions of social and physical pain. We argue that judgments of others' pain may vary as a function of group membership. By integrating research on intergroup bias in pain judgment with intergroup attributions of humanity, we predicted that observers tend to underestimate social pain more than physical pain in out‐groups compared with in‐groups. Across two studies that considered different scenarios, we found that Italian participants attributed less severe social pain when considering an out‐group (Chinese and Ecuadorian) than an in‐group member. No such effect was found for physical pain. Overall, the current work suggests an additional way through which people preserve a privileged human status to in‐group members while denying out‐group members' humanness. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Effects of Sex and Race of Perpetrator and Method of Killing on Outcome Judgments in a Mock Filicide Case

The present study examined college student mock jurors' judgments of legal insanity, outcome severity, and death-penalty decisions in a filicide case. The sex and race of perpetrator (Black or White) and method of killing (shooting or smothering) were varied in a between-subjects design. A 3-way interaction was found for outcome severity, supporting Jones & Davis' (1965) attributional principle of stronger dispositional attributions for unexpected behaviors. As predicted, White women were judged more severely when they used a gun compared to when they smothered, whereas White men were judged more severely when they smothered compared to when they used a gun. The most severe judgments were made for Black male perpetrators who used a gun. Results are discussed in terms of sex and racial stereotypes.     

Women’s Reporting of Physical Assaults to Police in a National Sample: A Brief Report

Research examining reporting decisions of women physically assaulted by any type of perpetrator is scarce. This study used data from the National Violence Against Women Survey (NVAWS) to examine how victim characteristics, assault characteristics, emotions during the assault, and postassault disclosure to informal social support sources affect victim and third-party reporting decisions in physical assault incidents. Results showed that victim education, race and ethnicity, victim–offender relationship, crime severity, perceived life threat, and disclosure to informal social support sources were related to victim reporting, whereas victim employment and marital status were associated with third-party reporting.     

Effects of Victim and Defendant Race on Jurors' Decisions in Child Sexual Abuse Cases1

We examined the influence of victim and defendant race, victim age, juror gender, and juror prejudice on jurors' decisions in child sexual abuse cases. In Experiments 1 and 2, mock jurors judged Black and Hispanic child victims to be more responsible for their sexual abuse than White victims. In Experiment 2, jurors assigned more guilt to defendants in cases involving victims and perpetrators of the same race compared to different races. Experiment 3 illustrated that laypeople believe same‐race cases to be more plausible generally. Experiment 2 revealed that high‐prejudiced White mock jurors made no more racially biased judgments than low‐prejudiced mock jurors. Finally, women were generally more pro‐victim in their case judgments than were men, and older victims were disadvantaged compared to younger victims in terms of perceived credibility and responsibility, and their cases were less likely to draw convictions.     

An Examination of Happiness, Racism, and Demographics on Judgments of Guilt

A policy-capturing study was conducted to evaluate the roles of both plaintiff and defendant race and gender on judgments of criminal guilt in either an assault or a theti case. It was hypothesized that defendant gender and race would affect likelihood of guilt ratings. Moreover, mock jurors' dispositional happiness, scores of modern racism, and race and gender were explored as potential influences on their decision-making policies and judgments. As predicted, strong support was found for the role of defendant gender on judgments of guilt. However, defendant race did not significantly impact guilt ratings. Post hoc analses revealed the importance of race and gender of the victim to juror decisions. In addition, participants' own race and gender played signiticant roles in the decisionmaking policies that were produced. Limitations of the study are discussed. as are topics for future research.     

How status and stereotypes impact attributions to discrimination: The stereotype-asymmetry hypothesis

Past research suggests a status-asymmetry effect in attributions to discrimination such that people are more likely to make attributions to discrimination when the victim is from a lower status group than the perpetrator as compared to when the victim is from a higher status group than the perpetrator. The present studies test a stereotype-asymmetry effect, such that people are more likely to make attributions to discrimination when rejection occurs in a domain in which the victim is negatively rather than positively stereotyped. In Study 1 (observers) and Study 2 (victims), participants attributed rejection following a job interview to discrimination more when the victim was negatively stereotyped than when the victim was positively stereotyped. The stereotypicality of the domain was more important than the relative status of the victim and the perpetrator in determining judgments of discrimination. Thus stereotype-asymmetry is a key feature of the discrimination prototype.     

Race Shapes Perceptions of Juvenile Offenders in Criminal Court1

We investigated the effects of defendant race, victim race, and juror gender on non‐African American mock jurors' perceptions of crimes committed by juvenile offenders. We predicted that mock jurors, particularly men, would render more pro‐prosecution case judgments when the defendant was African American than White. We also predicted that defendants would be judged more harshly when the crime victim was portrayed as White rather than as African American. Although there were few main effects of defendant race or victim race on case judgments, defendant and victim race by juror gender interactions revealed that men (but not women) demonstrated the predicted bias against African American defendants and victims. Explanations and implications are discussed.     

A victimization survey of female‐perpetrated assaults in the United Kingdom

A survey of a national representative sample of adults (1,455) in the United Kingdom investigated the incidence of female‐perpetrated assault as had been experienced by adult male and female respondents in any context over the past five years. Sampling was undertaken throughout the United Kingdom by a self‐completion instrument modeled on the Conflict Tactics Scale. Respondents reporting assault were also asked brief details about their assailant and the context of the assault (e.g., estimated age, relation to victim, and involvement of alcohol) and whether injury was suffered. Men reported being victimized by females more than women and experiencing the more severe forms of assault more than women. Single women were the most likely women to report a female assault, and approximately 50% of assaulted men reported that they experienced assault by a female intimate or ex‐intimate. Aggr. Behav. 25:67–79, 1999. © 1999 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

On the Importance of Attribution Theory in Political Psychology

Attribution theory, which was initially applied to the study of academic achievement, has generated a large amount of research in psychology. Judgments of causal responsibility, an important facet of attributions, have since been studied in a variety of other contexts, revealing that they pervade our understanding of the social world. The present paper considers the many ways in which causal judgments, particularly attributions of responsibility, influence political life. Examining scholarship primarily from the fields of psychology, political science, and sociology, I discuss how perceptions of responsibility are linked to ideology and how they influence policy attitudes (welfare, affirmative action, abortion, gay rights) and perceptions of international conflict (beliefs about terrorism and war). An argument is made for increased communication among fields and a more systematic application of attributional models to the study of political judgments.     

Assertiveness and Attributions of Blame toward Victims of Sexual Assault

This study investigated the influence of assertiveness on women's attributions of blame toward a victim of sexual assault. Women (N = 211) completed questionnaires assessing general and sexual assertiveness, viewed a video vignette of an acquaintance rape, and were asked to rate the degree of the woman's responsibility for the assault at three points during the video. Results indicated that the rater's level of assertiveness predicted the amount of blame she assigned to the victim of a sexual assault when the victim engaged in unassertive nonverbal resistance and assertive verbal resistance. Implications for prevention programming and forensic psychology (e.g., jury selection) are discussed.