Juror decision-making in a mock sexually violent predator trial: gender differences in the impact of divergent types of expert testimony

Despite widespread use of mental health testimony in cases where violence risk is at issue, relatively little is known about the impact of such information on juror decision-making. This study addressed the effects of testimony based on three types of risk assessment instrument or method (clinical opinion, actuarial assessment, and ratings of psychopathy) to examine whether they would have differential impact on jurors' perceptions of the defendant. In a mock sexually violent predator civil commitment trial, 172 undergraduates were presented a case summary that included prosecution and defense expert testimony related to violence risk based on one of the three methods noted above. Consistent with earlier research, the hypothesis that a defendant described as a "high risk psychopath" by the prosecution would be judged more severely than a defendant judged as "high risk" based on other evaluation procedures was supported, but only among female jurors. Unlike prior studies, little support was found for the hypothesis that clinical opinion testimony would be more influential than actuarially based testimony for either gender. Mechanisms that may underlie the observed gender differences are discussed, as are the potential implications of these findings for civil commitment proceedings.     

Determining dangerousness in sexually violent predator evaluations: cognitive-experiential self-theory and juror judgments of expert testimony

Past research examining the effects of expert testimony on the future dangerousness of a defendant in death penalty sentencing found that jurors are more influenced by less scientific clinical expert testimony and tend to devalue scientific actuarial testimony. This study was designed to determine whether these findings extend to civil commitment trials for sexual offenders and to test a theoretical rationale for this effect. In addition, we investigated the influence of a recently developed innovation in risk assessment procedures, Guided Professional Judgment (GPJ) instruments. Consistent with a cognitive-experiential self-theory based explanation, mock jurors motivated to process information in an experiential condition were more influenced by clinical testimony, while mock jurors in a rational mode were more influenced by actuarial testimony. Participants responded to clinical and GPJ testimony in a similar manner. However, participants' gender exerted important interactive effects on dangerousness decisions, with male jurors showing the predicted effect while females did not. The policy implications of these findings are discussed.     

The impact of mental health evidence on support for capital punishment: are defendants labeled psychopathic considered more deserving of death?

Controversy surrounds the use of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist--Revised (Hare, 1991, 2003) in capital murder cases, where it has been introduced to support prosecution claims that a defendant represents a "continuing threat to society". Although widely presumed to have a prejudicial impact (e.g., American Psychological Association, 2004), little is known about how the lay public reacts to data derived from ostensibly stigmatizing assessment instruments such as the PCL-R. The present study examined the effect of psychopathy data on layperson attitudes by having 203 undergraduates review a capital murder case where the results of the defendant's psychological evaluation were experimentally manipulated. When expert testimony described the defendant as psychopathic, a much larger percentage of participants supported a death sentence (60%) than when testimony indicated that he was psychotic (30%) or not mentally disordered (38%). Interestingly, participant ratings of how psychopathic they perceived the defendant to be--regardless of the testimony condition to which they had been assigned--also predicted support for a death sentence. Given the limited probative value of the PCL-R in capital cases and the prejudicial nature of the effects noted in this study, we recommend that forensic examiners avoid using it in these trials.     

The effects of labelling,expert testimony,and information processing mode on juror decisions in SVP civil commitment trials

Expert witnesses offering testimony in sexually violent predator civil commitment trials may use diagnostic labels that are either familiar (e.g. ‘psychopath’) or unfamiliar (e.g. ‘paraphilia’) to jurors. Using predictions based on cognitive experiential self-theory, we explored the influence of testimony type (clinical versus actuarial) and diagnostic label (psychopath versus paraphilia) on jurors motivated to adopt either an experiential processing mode (PM; in which heuristic cues may be strongly relied upon) or an analytic rational PM. Consistent with previous research, our results indicated that when given a psychopathic diagnostic label, mock jurors motivated to process information experientially were more influenced by clinical testimony, whereas mock jurors induced into a rational mode were more influenced by actuarial testimony. However, experientially oriented jurors given a paraphilia diagnostic label did not show the expected influence of clinical expert testimony, and instead were more persuaded by actuarial testimony. These findings are discussed from a judgement and heuristics cues framework. The implications of several procedural suggestions are examined. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Perceptions of Children's Credibility in Sexual Assault Cases1

Children's testimony often plays a central role in prosecutions of child sexual abuse. Nevertheless, research on jurors' perceptions of the credibility of child sexual assault victims remains limited. In three experiments, we examined mock jurors' reactions to children's testimony about sexual abuse. Participant jurors were exposed to videotaped or written scenarios of child sexual abuse trials and then rated victim credibility and defendant guilt. Analyses indicated that: (a) victim age was either inversely related or unrelated to perceptions of victim credibility, (b) women were more likely than men to find child victims credible, (c) corroborating testimony from a child victim increased the credibility of another child victim, and (d) exposure of participants to past criminal acts and other negative defendant character evidence heightened perceived victim credibility and defendant guilt. Implications for understanding jurors' reactions to child witnesses are discussed.     

Identity as a moderator of gender differences in the emotional closeness of emerging adults' same- and cross-sex friendships

Closeness is an integral aspect of friendships, and males and females differ in their closeness experiences within these relationships. However, identity development and friendship type (e.g., same-sex versus cross-sex friendships) may moderate these gender differences. In an attempt to clarify the relationships among gender, identity, and friendship closeness, the current study examined gender and identity associations with reported emotional closeness in emerging adults' same- and cross-sex friendships. Responses from 181 college undergraduates (89 males and 92 females) indicated similar levels of emotional closeness reported for same- and cross-sex friendships. Results also indicated overall identity commitment and friendship identity commitment associations with same-sex friendship closeness. Examination of closeness reports for cross-sex friends revealed a significant association with overall identity commitment for emerging adult males. A significant association was not indicated for emerging adult females. The associations between identity and emotional closeness in same-sex friendships and male cross-sex friendships support previous studies that report differences in the role of these relationships for emerging adult males and females. Findings are discussed in terms of understanding the gender and identity differences in emerging adults' reports of friendship closeness.     

Videotaped Versus In-Court Witness Testimony: Does Protecting the Child Witness Jeopardize Due Process?1

Videotaping depositions may protect a child witness from the stress of testifying in court but also may influence jurors’ perceptions of the child and the defendant, and jurors’ verdicts in systematic ways. The present study examines several psychological hypotheses that emerge from the controversy over the use of videotaped depositions of child witnesses in child sexual abuse trials. We predicted that student jurors viewing a videotaped deposition would be more proprosecution and less prodefense than those who did not receive testimony in such a form. Thus, it was predicted that jurors viewing a videotaped deposition would perceive the prosecution witnesses and their testimonies more favorably, the defense witnesses and their testimonies less favorably, and give more guilty verdicts than jurors who viewed identical testimony during the course of a trial. We also predicted that females would be more proprosecution and less prodefense than males and that this gender difference would be accentuated by the medium of presentation. The medium of presentation had only a few effects on jurors’ responses. However, when differences emerged, they generally provided support for the predicted main effects. The implications of these findings for the use of videotaped depositions of child sexual abuse victims are discussed.     

Preventing the Application of Stereotypic Biases in the Courtroom: The Role of Detailed Testimony1

To determine whether detailed testimony has equivalent effects on judgments of stereotyped and nonstereotyped defendants, subjects read a synopsis of a criminal court case in which the defendant either was a stereotyped offender or was not. Additionally, the degree of detail in the prosecution testimony and defense testimony was varied. Results indicated that defendant stereotypicality had a greater impact under conditions in which witnesses provided equal amounts of detail in their testimony. When witnesses differed in the degree of detail in their testimony, the stereotypicality of the defendant was disregarded and judgments favored the witness who provided greater detail. These findings suggest that stereotype application is not inevitable; rather, stereotypes may bias jurors' decision-making processes when the quality and quantity of the evidence does not easily lead to a confident judgment.     

I am not a Crook: Effects of Denials on Perceptions of a Defendant's Guilt, Personality, and Motives

Two studies were conducted to explore the effects of a defendant's overinformative denials (i.e., denials not prompted by an accusation or specific request) in a courtroom trial. Subjects read the testimony of a defendant who either did or did not deny several negative propositions (Study I) or whose denials either were or were not in response to the prosecutor's questions (Study 2). The denials had little effect on subjects' beliefs regarding the denied propositions. However, the defendant who provided the overinformative denials was perceived as being less trustworthy, more nervous, more concerned with presenting a positive image, and more likely to believe that others believed the negative propositions. Subjects who read the testimony of this defendant also generated more negative and fewer positive thoughts, and they perceived the defendant as being more guilty. The results illustrate the importance of the conversational context for determining the pragmatic meaning of a speaker's remarks.     

Psychopathic traits predict attitudes toward a juvenile capital murderer

The current study manipulated the presence/:absence of psychopathic traits and the ethnicity (Black/:White) of a juvenile capital murderer to examine their impact on layperson attitudes regarding what types of legal sanction were appropriate. Participants (N=360) reviewed a newspaper article concerning a death row inmate who was appealing his sentence primarily based on the fact that he committed the crime when he was 16 years of age. Compared to those in the control condition, those who read a scenario in which the defendant had been described at trial as exhibiting psychopathic traits (e.g. remorselessness, pathological lying) were significantly more likely to support a death sentence and less likely to believe he should receive any treatment in prison. Moreover, participant ratings of the extent to which they believed the defendant exhibited prototypically psychopathic traits (regardless of whether they were in the psychopathy or control condition) also significantly predicted these criterion measures. Ethnic status was relatively less influential, although participants were somewhat more punitive towards a Black defendant than a White defendant when considering the relevance of possible mitigating factors (e.g. history of sexual abuse).     

Undermining Reasonableness: Expert Testimony in a Case Involving a Battered Woman Who Kills

Student participants  ( N = 316)  viewed a videotaped simulated case involving a woman who had entered a self-defense plea in the shooting death of her abusive husband. As successful claims of self-defense rest on the portrayal of a defendant who has responded reasonably to his/her situation, the implications of various forms of expert testimony in constructing this narrative were examined. Jurors were presented with either expert testimony regarding the battered woman syndrome (BWS), the BWS framed within post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) nomenclature, or a no-expert control condition. As the BWS classification may support a stereotypical victim, the degree to which the defendant fit the stereotype in terms of her access to a social support network (family, friends, employment outside of the home) was varied within the expert testimony conditions to reflect either a high or low degree of stereotype fit. Although jury verdicts failed to differ across expert testimony and stereotype fit conditions, perceptions of her credibility and mental stability did. Although affording jurors a framework from which the defendant's experiences as a battered woman may be acknowledged, this portrayal, as advanced within PTSD nomenclature, endorsed a pathological characterization of the defendant. Implications of this discourse for battered women within the context of self-defense are discussed.     

Testifying on Eyewitness Reliability: Expert Advice Is Not Always Persuasive1

This study investigates the impact of different types of expert testimony regarding the unreliability of eyewitness identification. In two hypothetical court cases involving eyewitnesses, expert testimony was presented that was either sample-based (presenting the results of a research program on eyewitness identification) or person-based (presenting information about the particular eyewitness under consideration); the expert either offered causal explanations for his unreliability claim or failed to do so. Two additional control groups (with and without eye-witness identification) were not presented with any expert testimony. The results indicate that subjects who had been confronted with an expert statement made more lenient judgments about the offender but did not discount the eyewitness identification completely. Sample-based information had a moderate impact on the subjects' judgments, regardless of whether or not causal explanations were given. Person-based testimony was the most influential type of expert advice when a causal explanation was provided but the least influential one when no reasons were given. The practical (international differences in admissibility of expert testimony) and theoretical implications (processing of base-rate information) of these findings are discussed.     

Jury Panel Member Perceptions of Interpersonal‐Affective Traits of Psychopathy Predict Support for Execution in a Capital Murder Trial Simulation

Recent research with college undergraduate mock jurors suggests that how psychopathic they perceive a criminal defendant to be is a powerful predictor of whether they will support a death verdict in simulated capital murder trials. Perceived affective and interpersonal traits of psychopathy are especially predictive of support for capital punishment, with perceived remorselessness explaining a disproportionate amount of variance in these attitudes. The present study attempted to extend these findings with a more representative sample of community members called for jury duty (N = 304). Jurors reviewed a case vignette based on an actual capital murder trial, provided sentencing verdicts, and rated the defendant on several characteristics historically associated with the construct of psychopathy. Consistent with prior findings, remorselessness predicted death verdicts, as did the affective and interpersonal features of psychopathy – though the latter effect was more pronounced among jurors who were Caucasian and/or who described their political beliefs as moderate rather than conservative or liberal. Results are discussed in terms of the potentially stigmatizing effects of psychopathy evidence in capital cases. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Jurors Report that Risk Measure Scores Matter in Sexually Violent Predator Trials,but that Other Factors Matter More

After deliberating to a verdict, jurors (N = 462) from 40 sexually violent predator (SVP) trials completed a questionnaire asking them to rate the extent to which risk measure scores, diagnoses, expert witness testimony, and offender characteristics described during the trials influenced their commitment decisions. Jurors reported that offenders' sexual offending history, failure to change, and lack of remorse had the strongest influence on their commitment decisions. They reported that testimony about risk instrument scores (e.g., Static-99) and psychopathy had less influence on their decisions, but those who did report being influenced by instrument results were especially likely to view the offender as being at a high risk for reoffending. Overall, findings suggest that SVP jurors view risk measure results as important, but not as important as other offender, offense, and testimony characteristics, including some that have limited relevance to recidivism risk. Thus, findings also suggest that experts may need to better educate jurors regarding factors that do and do not relate to recidivism risk. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Not Always a Straight Path: College Students’ Narratives of Heterosexual Identity Development

Research has recently begun to examine heterosexual identity development, providing preliminary evidence of variation within a sexual identity category that has frequently been conceptualized as uniform and unremarkable. The current study sought to classify and describe young adult participants’ narratives on their heterosexual identity development using Worthington et al. (2002) heterosexual identity status model. Participants included 1,051 heterosexually-identified undergraduates (632 women; 419 men) from two public universities in the western United States who provided written narratives about their sexual identity development. Responses were analyzed for levels of identity exploration and commitment, which were used to create five identity status categories. The majority of participants described identity commitment with passive exploration, with more men in this category than women. A significant subset of participants described identity commitment with active exploration, with more women in this category than men. Smaller numbers of participants described active exploration without commitment, unexplored commitment, and identity diffusion. More women were in the active exploration without commitment status than men; no gender differences emerged in the other two statuses. Participants classified into statuses with active exploration and higher commitment also evidenced higher scores on quantitative measures of sexual identity exploration and commitment, respectively. Men evidenced higher quantitative scores than women on identity commitment; there were no gender differences in the quantitative assessment of identity exploration. Findings support the existence of variations and systematic gender-based differences in young adults’ heterosexual identity development.     

Reaction of mock jurors to testimony of a court appointed expert

A study was conducted to assess the impact of court appointed experts on the judgments of mock jurors. A civil proceeding was adopted for the experiment. Mock jurors heard testimony about a plaintiff's injury in an automobile accident. In some conditions, medical testimony for the plaintiff and defendant was provided by experts hired by each side. In other conditions, a medical expert appointed by the court testified in addition to the two adversarial experts. In one of these conditions, the court expert sided with the plaintiff; in another, the expert sided with the defendant. The plaintiff in the case was always an individual. The defendant was sometimes a corporation and sometimes an individual. The results showed that mock jurors sided with the court appointed expert in every condition except when the expert favored a corporate defendant. The results were discussed in terms of heuristic processing of persuasive information.     

Demystification of the Relationship Between Psychopathy and Happiness

Recent findings have provided evidence for a negative correlation between psychopathy and happiness. In order to determine if this correlation is generalizable to all subtypes of psychopathy, participants from the community (N = 572) were recruited to examine happiness-related features among males and females by psychopathic subtypes. Examination of the Fearless-Dominance (PPI-I) and Impulsive-Antisociality (PPI-II) subscales of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory-Short Form provided evidence for two distinct patterns when comparing psychopathic personality traits to happiness-related features. PPI-I was positively correlated with higher durable happiness, presence of a meaning in life, personal growth and hope, and correlated negatively with fluctuating happiness. PPI-II was negatively correlated with durable happiness, presence of a meaning in life, personal growth and hope, and correlated positively with fluctuating happiness and searching for a meaning in life. Despite a few differences, both genders displayed an overall similar pattern between measures of well-being and psychopathic subtypes. Implications for psychopathy regarding the importance of performing analyses by gender and subtypes are discussed.     

Opinion formation in evaluating the adjudicative competence and restorability of criminal defendants: a review of 8,000 evaluations

Evaluations of competence to stand trial (CST) are the most common type of criminal forensic evaluation conducted, and courts tend to defer to clinician opinions regarding a defendant's competence. Thus, it is important to study the ways in which clinicians arrive at opinions regarding adjudicative competence and the data they consider in forming their opinions. We reviewed 8,416 evaluations conducted by forensic evaluators in Virginia over a 12 year period, and examined (a) the clinical, demographic, and criminal characteristics of a defendant as related to opinions regarding competence, predicted restorability, and impairment on "prongs" of the Dusky standard, (b) process and outcome differences in evaluations conducted by psychiatrists versus psychologists and inpatient versus outpatient evaluators, and (c) the consistency of incompetence base rates over a 10 year period. Overall, clinicians opined that 19% of defendants were incompetent and considered 23% of these unlikely to be restored to competence. Not surprisingly, psychotic and organic/intellectual disorders were most strongly associated with findings of incompetence. However, there were some notable differences between evaluations by psychologists versus psychiatrists and between evaluations conducted in inpatient versus outpatient settings.