Criminal sentence recommendations in a simulated rape trial: Examining juror prejudice in Canada

This experiment examined the moderating influence of judicial instructions on prejudicial sentencing recornmendations in a simulated videotaped rape trial. Subjects were 243 Canadian university students who were randomly assigned to one of eight conditions and asked to assume the role of juror. In the rape trial, the race of the defendant and victim were varied (either White or Black) and in half of the conditions the judge's instructions to the jury were excluded. Results indicated a 2 (defendant race) × 2 (victim race) × 2 (judicial instructions) interaction with interracial rape generating longer sentence recommendations in the presence of judicial instructions and intra-racial rape eliciting longer sentence allotment in the absence of judicial instructions. Results are contrasted with reports on juror decision-making in the U.S.     

The Determinants of Mock Jurors' Verdicts in a Rape Case1

The determinants of verdicts in a rape case were examined. Pretrial attitudes (rape empathy, juror bias, belief in a just world, and authoritarianism) were measured to ascertain both the intercorrelations among the attitudes and their predictive value of verdicts. The eye contact (staring, avoiding, or random) of the alleged rape victim with the defendant was also examined. Results showed that rape empathy was predictive of verdict. The eye contact of the alleged victim with the defendant also affected verdicts of female mock jurors. Specifically, when eye contact was avoided, more guilty verdicts were rendered. Furthermore, interpretation of eye contact was found to be a function of mock jurors' reported rape empathy. Specifically, subjects who reported empathy with the victim tended to interpret the victim's behavior as consistent with being raped. Finally, differences were found between high and low empathizers for the rape victim in what aspects of the trial were important to mock jurors' decisions.     

Mock Juror Attribution of Criminal Responsibility: Effects of Race and the Guilty But Mentally III (GBMI) Verdict Option1

The present study examined three questions relevant to the insanity defense: Does the availability of the alternative verdict “Guilty But Mentally III” affect juror assessment of criminal responsibility? Does race of defendant significantly affect juror decision-making about who should be acquitted under the insanity defense? And does race of victim significantly influence how jurors decide their final insanity defense verdicts? Race of defendant (black or white), race of victim (black or white), and verdict choice set [(Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity (NGRI), Guilty, and Not Guilty) vs. (Guilty but Mentally III (GBMI), NGRI, Guilty, and Not Guilty)] were systematically varied. The mock-trial was presented to 197 college student subjects by means of an audiotape and slide show. Following the re-enacted trial, subjects answered a series of questions regarding the case. The main dependent variable was the rendered verdict. Both χ²loglinear analyses revealed a significant relationship between race of defendant and verdict such that the defendant, when presented as black, was acquitted NGRI significantly more often than when the defendant was presented as white. No significant effects were found for race of victim. The availability of the GBMI verdict option resulted in a twofold effect: There was a two-thirds reduction in both NGRI and straight guilty verdicts when the GBMI verdict option was made available. The implications for legal policy and future research are discussed.     

Mock Jurors’ Perception of Stalking: The Impact of Gender and Expressed Fear

Two experiments investigated mock-juror perceptions of intimate stalking using Kentucky’s (United States) anti-stalking legislation. Experiment 1 used a mock-juror methodology in which 177 undergraduates (87 men and 90 women) from a large southeastern US university read a stalking trial summary and rendered individual judgments as mock jurors. The main research question of Experiment 1 was how participant gender impacted trial judgments (e.g., verdict) when the gender of both the defendant and victim were manipulated. Overall, the results showed that men rendered significantly fewer guilty verdicts than women, particularly in conditions that included the prototypical type of intimate stalking (female victim/male defendant). In Experiment 2, also using a mock-juror methodology, 129 undergraduates (51 men and 78 women) from a large southeastern U.S. university read a stalking trial summary (involving a female victim and male defendant) and rendered individual judgments as mock jurors. The main research question of Experiment 2 focused on whether victim fear (high or low) impacted trial judgments (e.g., verdict). The results yielded an interaction of participant gender and victim fear. Specifically, whereas different levels of fear did not impact women, men yielded fewer guilty verdicts in the low victim fear condition compared to the high victim fear condition. The results of the present experiments are discussed in terms of the implications of stalking allegations brought to trial.     

The Law and Information Processing: Implications for Verdicts in Rape Cases1

This study investigated the effects of focus of attention (victim vs. defendant) and the ability to recommend a sentence in addition to rendering a verdict versus rendering only a verdict on judgments in a rape case. Support was found for the hypothesis that participants would more often find the defendant guilty, and would be more confident in their guilty verdict when a sentence could be recommended in addition to the verdict, compared to those who only recommended a verdict. This pattern was especially prominent for females. This finding is discussed in terms of the standard of reasonable doubt that mock jurors may impose on their verdict decision. Interactions between the independent variables suggest that these factors may prompt mock jurors to selectively attend to particular types of information at particular times.     

How Video Image Size Interacts with Evidence Strength,Defendant Emotion,and the Defendant–Victim Relationship to Alter Perceptions of the Defendant

Courtroom video presentations can range from images on small screens installed in the jury box to images on courtroom video monitors or projection screens. Does video image size affect jurors' perceptions of information presented during trials? To investigate this we manipulated video image size as well as defendant emotion level presented during testimony (low, moderate), the defendant–victim relationship (spouses, strangers), and the strength of the evidence (weak, strong). Participants (N = 263) read a case and trial summary, watched video of defendant testimony, and then answered a questionnaire. Larger screens generally accentuated what was presented (e.g., made stronger evidence seem stronger and weaker evidence seem weaker), acting mainly upon trial outcome variables (e.g., verdict). Non‐trial outcomes (e.g., defendant credibility) were generally affected by defendant emotion level and the defendant–victim relationship. Researchers and attorneys presenting video images need to recognize that respondents may evaluate videotaped trial evidence differently as a function of how video evidence is presented. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Empathy's Relation to Appraisal of the Emotional Child Witness

When observing others, we often try to determine how they ‘really feel’ deep down inside (emotional feeling) regardless of their outward expression (emotional appearance). We examined whether child victim empathy predicts appraisal of a child sexual assault victim's emotional feelings and, in turn, child and defendant believability and verdict decisions. Undergraduates (N = 50) rated photographs of 5‐ and 13‐year‐olds' degree of sadness. Then, a new group of undergraduates (N = 354), randomly assigned within a 2 (victim age) × 2 (victim gender) × 3 (victim sadness: low, medium, and high/teary) factorial design, read trial scenarios accompanied by one of the photographs. Participants rated the victim's emotional feeling and emotional appearance, victim and defendant believability, defendant guilt, and confidence in their verdict. A structural equation model that included a relation between empathy and emotion appraisal fit the data well: Empathy predicted appraisal of the victim's feelings, which, in turn, predicted perceived believability. Implications are discussed.Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Consideration of Rape: The Effect of Target Information Disparity on Judgments of Guilt1

We hypothesized that increasing the amount of individuating but case‐irrelevant information about a target in a date‐rape trial (i.e., either the defendant or the victim/witness) would increase attributions of responsibility for that target and would thus influence judgments of defendant guilt. As predicted, merely adding trivial information, such as the victim's age, college major, and city of residence, to the rape trial vignette decreased judgments of guilt for the defendant; whereas adding corresponding information regarding the defendant increased judgments of his guilt. Ratings of perceived similarity to defendant and victim correlated significantly with responsibility and guilt, but were unaffected by the information manipulation. We suggest that target information increases target salience, which results in an increase of attributions of responsibility.     

The effects of consensus requirements and multiple decisions on mock juror verdict preferences

After watching a simulated rape trial, prerecorded on videotape, mock jurors either did or did not expect to sentence a defendant following deliberation with or without a group verdict required. Both sentencing expectation and verdict requirement significantly elevated jurors' preference for conviction (and average ratings of guilt likelihood). Closer analyses of personal changes (before and after deliberation) in the distribution of opinions suggested that majorities favoring not guilty were more influential than guilty-favoring majorities; and, somewhat unexpectedly, minorities in juries which deliberated without a verdict required were more likely to change personal opinions than minorities in juries required to render a verdict. The overall social decision scheme confirmed earlier observations about the importance of the initial majority in determining the verdict; but the majority did not always prevail and there was a marked asymmetry (“defendant protection”) in its action.     

Child‐Witness and Defendant Credibility: Child Evidence Presentation Mode and Judicial Instructions1

Child‐witness presentation mode, judicial instructions, and deliberation stage effects on juror ratings of child witness and defendant were investigated Perceptions of the impact of presentation mode on witnesses, juror task, and justice also were explored. Participants (N= 108) viewed a simulated child sexual abuse trial videotape. Overall child‐witness credibility was significantly more positive with videodeposition or court‐given child evidence than with videolink. The defendant was seen as more definitely guilty when child testimony was court given than by videodeposition or videolink. Presentation mode also significantly influenced perceived impact on child witness, defendant case, and juror task. Judicial instructions interacted with presentation mode to affect perceptions of impact on child witness and juror task. Findings are discussed in relation to previous research, and implications for future research and practice are outlined.     

CYCLE OF BLAME OR JUST WORLD

The conviction rate for sexual assault is persistently low in the United States. We propose a cycle-of-blame framework to highlight the possibility that the same rape myths that limit convictions are in turn strengthened by not-guilty verdicts. Participants read a summary of a rape trial. In different conditions, they were told that the jury's verdict was guilty or not guilty. In a No-Verdict condition, participants merely read the summary. All 96 participants subsequently responded to questionnaires measuring rape-myth acceptance and victim empathy. Gender affected both the myth and empathy measures, with women accepting fewer myths than men and exhibiting more empathy for the victim. Gender and Condition interacted such that men showed greater acceptance of rape myths and less empathy after a not-guilty versus a guilty verdict. Women evidenced consistently high empathy across conditions and greater myth acceptance after a guilty verdict. Although the cycle-of-blame principle is consistent with the performance of men, women's data require a different interpretation, which we base on just-world theory.     

The Impact of Defendant Gender and Relationship to Victim on Juror Decisions in a Child Sexual Abuse Case

We examined the impact of defendant gender and relationship to victim on verdict decisions and ratings of witness believability in a case of alleged child sexual assault. Mock jurors ( N  = 256) read 1 of 4 extensive case summaries. The cases varied the gender of the defendant and his or her relationship to the child (parent or stranger). Data revealed that participants were significantly more likely to find male defendants (especially the father) guilty than female defendants. Female jurors rated the victim as more believable and the defendant as less believable than did male jurors. All mock jurors rated the victim as more believable if the defendant was male, and they saw the female defendants as more believable than the male defendants.     

Effects of the “intimate conviction” instruction on the processing of judicial information

Introduction and objectiveThe aim of this study was to examine the effects of the “intimate conviction” (IC) instruction on the processing of judicial information. The IC instruction encourages the use of impressions to form a verdict. As such, according to cognitive-experiential self-theory (CEST) (Epstein, 1994), it is more likely to (1) elicit experiential information processing, and (2) bias judgments, compared with instructions prompting the rational and objective processing of information running counter to IC (CIC).Method and resultsNinety-four mock jurors were randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions (IC, opposite IC and control), and asked to view a video of a criminal appeal hearing, deliver judgments and perform a thought-listing task. Results confirmed that, in the IC and control conditions, participants were more likely to (1) process evidence in an experiential mode, (2) judge the defendant's acts as being more intentional than participants in the opposite IC condition. However, contrary to our expectations, the effects of the instructions on the attribution of intention were not mediated by the information processing mode.ConclusionDirections for future research and the implications of the present study for judicial systems using inquisitorial procedure are discussed.     

Race,Rape, and Bias: Distortion of Prior Odds and Meaning Changes

Two experiments were conducted to investigate how racial bias affects juror decision making. Three sources of bias were studied: (1) prior probabilities of guilt, (2) distortion of the meaning of evidence, and (3) differential weighting of information. A paired comparison technique employed in the first study revealed that pretrial probabilities of guilt were greater when the victim was White than when she was Black. In the second experiment, a different group of subjects viewed one of four videotaped simulated rape trials in which seven segments of testimony had been previously rated as pro-prosecution, pro-defense, or neutral. During the trial, subjects rated each segment on three different scales: prosecution, defense, and degree of defendant guilt. Results indicated that neutral evidence was seen as more favorable to prosecution for a White victim compared to a Black victim. Evidence which favored either prosecution or defense was not distorted. Regression analyses revealed a positive relationship between estimates of guilt and distortion of evidence. The weight or importance of the evidence did not vary as a function of victim or defendant race. Years of recommended imprisonment indicated greater severity toward the Black assailant of a White woman. The results suggest that bias in favor of White victims occurs both in the assessment of pretrial probabilities and perception of evidence.     

Sex,Sexual Orientation,and Sexism: What Influence Do These Factors Have on Verdicts in a Crime-of-Passion Case?

ABSTRACT

This study investigated the influence of defendant sex, sexual orientation, and participant sex on perceptions of a crime-of-passion. An online sample of 458 individuals read a scenario describing a homicide and provided judgments of verdict, sentence length, legal elements, and sexism. We hypothesized heterosexual female defendants would most likely receive a verdict of manslaughter, be found less guilty, and receive shorter sentences. We were also interested in whether benevolent sexism would contribute to defendant culpability decisions. Lastly, perceptions of legal elements for manslaughter (e.g., great provocation) and murder (e.g., intentionality of actions) were explored. Results demonstrated heterosexual female defendants were less guilty and received the shortest sentences. Also, heterosexual defendants were most likely to meet the manslaughter legal elements. Benevolent sexism contributed significantly to guilt perceptions.