Socioeconomic Status and Belief in a Just World: Sentencing of Criminal Defendants1

The present study investigated whether defendants' socioeconomic status (SES) and jurors' beliefs in a just world affected punishment and blame decisions. The study's 273 participants completed the Just World Scale ( Rubin & Peplau, 1975 ) and read a case scenario describing an aggravated murder. Participants rendered a verdict and answered questions concerning confidence, responsibility, and degree of guilt. Analyses partially supported the hypothesis. High believers in a just world were more likely to assign higher degrees of guilt and to sentence low SES defendants more severely than high SES or no SES information defendants.     

Sentencing severity with mock jurors: Predictive validity of three variable categories

Previous studies have identified three categories of variables which influence decisions of mock jurors: type of crime, defendant characteristics, and personal characteristics of jurors. This study manipulated the following variables towards the ends of assessing their influence on mock jurors' sentencing severity: premeditated vs. unpremeditated murder, black vs. white defendant, low SES vs. high SES defendant. Only defendant SES predicted sentencing severity: low SES defendants were assigned significantly longer sentences than high SES defendants. None of the measures of juror characteristics correlated with sentencing severity. Failure to replicate significant relationships with most of these variables and sentencing severity suggest that results of studies which manipulate only one variable dimension may overestimate the influence of these variable dimensions in mock jurors' decisions.     

The effect of physical appearance on the judgment of guilt,interpersonal attraction,and severity of recommended punishment in a simulated jury task

Both an opinion survey and an experimental study were conducted. The survey revealed that substantial majorities of those polled believed (a) that a defendant's character and previous history should influence jurors' decision (79%) and (b) that the defendant's physical appearance should not bias these decisions (93%). The hypothesis, derived from a reinforcement model of interpersonal attraction and previous research on physical appearance, was that attractive defendants would be more positively evaluated than unattractive ones despite the seeming irrelevance of appearance to judicial decisions. The results of a simulated jury task were that physically attractive defendants were evaluated with less certainty of guilt (p < .05), less severe recommended punishment (p < .005), and greater attraction (p < .005), than were unattractive defendants. The importance of independent affective and cognitive components of the attraction process were emphasized.     

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.     

Effects of Mental Health and Neuroscience Evidence on Juror Perceptions of a Criminal Defendant: the Moderating Role of Political Orientation

Several recent studies have examined the effects of mental health and neuroscientific evidence on attitudes toward criminal defendants, suggesting that these factors may influence juror decision‐making in meaningful ways. Few studies to date have manipulated both of these variables while also considering theoretically important individual difference variables (e.g., political orientation). Using a criminal case simulation, this study manipulated the presence of evidence concerning mental disorders (psychopathy and schizophrenia) and increasing levels of neuroscientific detail regarding a defendant's brain injury, and examined verdicts and sentencing recommendations in over 400 persons attending jury duty. Main effects were detected for mental health testimony and political orientation, although interactions were noted as well. More negative reactions to defendants labeled as psychopaths were relatively consistent, whereas participants who identified as liberal generally were less punitive towards a defendant identified as schizophrenic than were more conservative jurors. Consistent with other recent research, juror perceptions of the defendant's level of psychopathic traits (independent of the effects of the experimental manipulations) predicted guilty verdicts and longer sentencing recommendations. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Enforcing Christian Nationalism: Examining the Link Between Group Identity and Punitive Attitudes in the United States

This article examines whether the convergence of an individual's religious and national identities promotes authoritarian attitudes towards crime and deviance. Drawing on theories of social control and group conformity, as well as Christian nationalism's influence on intolerance toward out‐groups, I argue that the inability to distinguish between religious and national identities increases desire for group homogeneity and therefore increases willingness to utilize formalized measures of social control. Analysis of 2007 Baylor Religion Survey data demonstrates that adherence to Christian nationalism predicts three indicators of authoritarian views toward controlling crime and deviance: support for capital punishment, stricter punishment for federal crime, and for society to “crackdown on troublemakers.” These effects are robust to the inclusion of a comprehensive battery of 20 socioeconomic, political, and religious controls, and are consistent with previous research on Christian nationalism showing it is not religious commitment or traditionalism per se that leads to intolerant attitudes, but rather the conflation of one's religious identity with other social identities, in this case national. These findings indicate that, beyond sociopolitical and religious influences, the belief that the United States is, and should be, a “Christian nation” increases desires for group conformity and strict control for both criminals and “troublemakers.”     

Relation of Affect Control Theory to the Sentencing of Criminals

Abstract

Past researchers (A. Blumstein, J. Cohen, S. E. Martin, & M. H. Tonry, 1983; A. Von Hirsch & H. Gross, 1981) have explored legal variables and demonstrated the significance of various criteria (e.g., criminal's prior record, seriousness of offense, influence of victim) on the sentencing of criminals. Affect control theory (D. R. Heise, 1979) focuses on inferences about the identity of the criminal. In the present study, the author examined the influence of the foregoing legal variables and affect control theory in sentencing decisions by using U.S. undergraduates' reactions to statements of criminals and of victims. Results of a 2 (criminal's emotion: sad vs. unconcerned) x 2 (victim's emotion: sad vs. unconcerned) x 2 (prior record: none vs. auto theft) factorial design supported affect control theory and demonstrated the significance of the victim's perceived identity in sentencing decisions, even when information about the prior record was provided.     

Racial Attitudes and the Death Penalty1

This study investigated the relationship between overt and subtle forms of racism with Whites' recommendations for capital sentencing of Black and White offenders convicted of murder. White participants (n= 104) viewed 5 other “jurors” (all Whites or 4 Whites and 1 Black) on videotape individually presenting their decisions to vote for the death penalty in the case. It was hypothesized that the bias of high prejudice-scoring participants would be overt, but that the pattern for low prejudice-scoring participants would be more complex. As predicted, among high prejudice-scoring participants, Black defendants received stronger recommendations for the death penalty than did White defendants. Among low prejudice-scoring White participants, Black offenders received stronger recommendations for the death penalty only when a Black juror advocated the death penalty.     

Justice at any cost? The impact of cost–benefit salience on criminal punishment judgments

This study investigated the effect of cost–benefit salience on simulated criminal punishment judgments. In two vignette‐based survey experiments, we sought to identify how the salience of decision costs influences laypeople's punishment judgments. In both experiments (N₁ = 109; N₂ = 398), undergraduate participants made sentencing judgments with and without explicit information about the direct, material costs of incarceration. Using a within‐subjects design, Experiment 1 revealed that increasing the salience of incarceration costs mitigated punishments. However, when costs were not made salient, punishments were no lower than those made when the costs were externalized (i.e., paid by a third party). Experiment 2 showed the same pattern using a between‐subjects design. We conclude that, when laypeople formulate sentencing attitudes without exposure to the costs of the punishment, they are prone to discount those costs, behaving as if punishment is societally cost‐free. However, when cost information is salient, they utilize it, suggesting the operation of a genuine, albeit labile, punishment preference. We discuss the implications of these findings for psychological theories of decision making and for sentencing policy, including the degree of transparency about the relevant costs of incarceration during the decision process.     

Effects of neuroimaging evidence on mock juror decision making

During the penalty phase of capital trials, defendants may introduce mitigating evidence that argues for a punishment "less than death." In the past few years, a novel form of mitigating evidence-brain scans made possible by technological advances in neuroscience-has been proffered by defendants to support claims that brain abnormalities reduce their culpability. This exploratory study assessed the impact of neuroscience evidence on mock jurors' sentencing recommendations and impressions of a capital defendant. Using actual case facts, we manipulated diagnostic evidence presented by the defense (psychosis diagnosis; diagnosis and neuropsychological test results; or diagnosis, test results, and neuroimages) and future dangerousness evidence presented by the prosecution (low or high risk). Recommendations for death sentences were affected by the neuropsychological and neuroimaging evidence: defendants deemed at high risk for future dangerousness were less likely to be sentenced to death when jurors had this evidence than when they did not. Neuropsychological and neuroimaging evidence also had mitigating effects on impressions of the defendant. We describe study limitations and pose questions for further research.     

Defendant characteristics and juridic decisions

Research has demonstrated that attractive defendants receive more preferential treatment than do less attractive defendants. The present study examined two explanations for this finding (liking-leniency and causal inference models). It varied both the attractiveness of the defendant's traits and their relevance to the likelihood of committing a traffic felony. Results indicated that the attractive defendant was found less guilty than the unattractive defendant only when the traits were associated with the likelihood of acting criminally. This suggests that a causal inference model was appropriate when subjects decided guilt. However, a liking-leniency model was supported for decisions on severity of punishment as the attractive defendant was treated more leniently than the unattractive defendant, regardless of the relevancy of the traits to the crime.     

The power of the majority: Social conformity in sexual harassment punishment selection

In his famous social conformity experiments in the 1950's, Asch found 75% of participants conformed to confederates’ incorrect answers at least once, with an overall conformity rate of 32%, revealing that humans are highly likely to conform to group behavior even when that behavior is clearly wrong. The purpose of this study was to determine if the social conformity effect generalized to scenarios involving sexual harassment punishment selections in the workplace. Participants read various workplace sexual harassment scenarios and then witnessed four confederates chose one of three types of punishments (verbal warning, 1-week suspension, or termination). The confederates stated aloud punishments that were either appropriate (i.e., similar to normative data) or inappropriate (i.e., deviating either too harshly or leniently to normative data). Participants then provided their punishments selection aloud, and confidentially rated their decision confidence. We found an overall conformity rate of 46%, as 82.67% conformed at least once to harsh or lenient punishment selections. Participants who conformed to incorrect punishment selections exhibited lower levels of decision confidence, indicating that conformity may have been due more to social normative influence. The current results imply the social responses of others (i.e., coworkers, supervisors, or HR) can impact responses to sexual harassment. The results imply that social influence may be a significant contributing factor in mislabeling, misreporting, or inappropriately punishing sexual harassment in some organizations.     

The Effect of Strong Versus Weak Evidence on the Assessment of Race Stereotypic and Race Nonstereotypic Crimes1

The effects of defendant race, type of crime, and strength of evidence on the perception and evaluation of criminal offenses were examined. Consistent with past research, defendants accused of race stereotypic crimes were more likely to be perceived as guilty and as more typical offenders than were defendants accused of race nonstereotypic crimes. The strength of evidence supplied to subjects did moderate the interaction between defendant race and type of crime on some of the punishment items. These findings and their implications for future related research are discussed.     

Aggression and social status: the moderating roles of sex and peer‐valued characteristics

Research on peer rejection has long emphasized links between aggressive behavior and peer liking, with aggressive children and adolescents being more rejected by peers. However, recent research shows that at least some aggressive students enjoy considerable power and influence and are perceived as “popular” within the peer group. To understand the processes underlying links between aggression and social status, the present research considered three distinct indices of social status (social preference, perceived popularity, and power) and investigated the degree to which the possession of peer‐valued characteristics moderated the links between status and aggression and whether these links varied by sex. A sample of 585 adolescents (grades 6–10) completed peer evaluation measures assessing social status, aggression (overt/physical, indirect/relational), and the degree to which peers possessed eight different peer‐valued characteristics (e.g., attractiveness, athleticism, etc.). Although sociometric indices of status were significantly related to perceived popularity, especially for boys, perceptions of power were more strongly linked to perceived popularity than to sociometric likeability. Moreover, the three indices of social status were differentially related to peers' assessments of aggression and to peer‐valued characteristics, with notable sex differences. As predicted, regression analyses demonstrated that the observed relationships between social status and aggression were moderated by the possession of peer‐valued characteristics; aggressive students who possessed peer‐valued characteristics enjoyed higher levels of perceived popularity and power and less disliking than those who did not. This relationship varied as a function of sex, the type of aggression considered, and the status construct predicted. Aggr. Behav. 32:396–408, 2006. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Conditions Of Life And Parental Values

The study constitutes an expansion of Kohn's work on social class and parental values, in two directions: firstly a search for value dimensions other than Kohn's self-direction/conformity; and secondly, an investigation of three aspects of social structure: immigrant status, quality of neighbourhood and housing type. Data were collected from parents of 305 9–11-year-olds resident in Sydney. Kohn's parental values instrument was used, but analysed using a multivariate linear model rather than the traditional way (factor analysis followed by a univariate multiple regression). Immigrant status, neighbourhood quality, family income, child's sex and street type all predicted particular parental value sets. Non Anglo immigrnts differed from other groups in their strong emphasis on school performance, sex role performance and sibling relations. Parents in higher quality neighbourhoods put greater value on children's sociability than did those in higher risk neighbourhoods. Self-control, school performance and neatness/cleanliness were favoured by middle income families. Parents living in industrial/commercial streets devalued school performance, achievement striving and curiosity. Parental occupation and education did not have significant predictive power over and above the contribution of these variables. Reanalysis of the data using Kohn's factor analytic procedure gave the traditional self-direction/conformity factor, but immigrant status, quality of neighbourhood and income continued to explain more variance than occupation or education. Implications of the findings are discussed.     

Bias in sentencing: A preliminary analysis of community service sentences

Debate regarding judicial bias in sentencing remains intense despite numerous studies on the subject. Recent research has emphasized the roles of judicial discretion and the cumulative effect of bias in the criminal justice system. This article employs preliminary data from community service sentencing to explore ethnic and gender biases for a sample of defendants. It is argued that these data have unique advantages for disentangling the effect of bias from other items, including prior record, seriousness of offense, and initial plea. The data reveal both ethnic and gender biases in sentencing under circumstances where judges have discretion, but no biases where discretion is limited.     

The Angry Juror: Sentencing Decisions in First‐Degree Murder

A great deal of research in legal decision making has overlooked the influence of affect on the decision‐making process. The present study measured the fluctuation of emotions across five time points of a capital trial and tested the overall relationship between changes in emotion and sentencing decisions. The results showed that across all participants, anger initially increased and then decreased during the course of a capital punishment trial. Most importantly, the more individual mock jurors' anger increased during any stage of the trial, the more likely they were to assign a death sentence. Furthermore, when jurors' anger increased, they rated mitigating factors presented by the defense as weaker and the weaker mitigation mediated the relationship between change in anger and sentencing. The paper ends with a discussion of theoretical explanations and policy implications. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.