Invariance in the MMPI's component structure

Bernstein and Garbin (1985b) suggested that the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory's major clinical scales (excluding Scales ? and 5) can be approximated by an oblique three-component structure: (a) Profile Elevation, (b) Test-taking Attitudes, and (c) Optimism-Pessimism, collectively termed the salient weight model. In this study, we found that both this model and the MMPI's principal component structure remain invariant across race, sex, and, as previously noted, context of testing (job applicants vs. inmates in correctional institutions). We further noted that several alternative definitions of Profile Elevation provide equally satisfactory representation of the relations among the scales. This factor invariance is necessary, but not sufficient, for the MMPI to be viewed as unbiased.     

Stability of self-esteem as a moderator of the relation between level of self-esteem and depression

The hypothesis that stability of self-esteem would moderate the predictive relationship between level of self-esteem and depression was tested. Specifically, level of self-esteem was hypothesized to relate more strongly to subsequent depression for individuals with stable self-esteem than for individuals with unstable self-esteem. Results strongly supported this hypothesis. Implications for the relation between level of self-esteem and depression, and for the moderator variable approach to personality and prediction, are discussed.     

Effects of Considering Who and Why the Defendant Attacked1

Some people who are accused of a crime admit to the act, but provide an excuse. The effects of an excuse's self‐inflictedness level (high, moderate, or low) and the type of victim attacked (one partially responsible for the defendant's excusing condition, or innocent victim) were investigated. After a pretest (N= 26) to choose stimuli, participants (N= 220) read a scenario in which a male attacks another and then, once on trial, gives an excuse for his act. Those giving highly vs. less self‐inflicted excuses were more likely to receive a guilty verdict, received higher guilt level ratings, and tended to receive longer sentences; those who hurt an innocent vs. a partially responsible victim were more likely to be found guilty. In addition, the defendant's sentence was influenced by both the type of victim and the self‐inflictedness level of the excuse. The influence of perceived responsibility for an act on jurors' decisions is discussed     

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.     

Stability and level of self-esteem as predictors of anger arousal and hostility

We examined stability of self-esteem and level of self-esteem as predictors of dispositional tendencies to experience anger and hostility. We reasoned that individuals with unstable high self-esteem would report especially high tendencies to experience anger and hostility, and that individuals with stable high self-esteem would report particularly low tendencies. We expected individuals with stable and unstable low self-esteem to fall between these two extremes. These predictions were derived from an analysis of anger and hostility that emphasized the instigating role of threats to self-esteem. Stability of self-esteem was assessed through multiple assessments of global self-esteem in naturalistic settings. Results revealed the predicted pattern for the tendency to experience anger and a "motor" component of hostility. The importance of considering both stability and level of self-esteem in analyses of anger and hostility is discussed.     

How the Defendant's Emotion Level Affects Mock Jurors' Decisions When Presentation Mode and Evidence Strength Are Varied1

Two experiments (N= 443) were conducted to investigate the effects of a defendant's emotion level during testimony on mock jurors' decisions. In Experiment 1, the defendant's level of emotion (low, moderate, high) and mode of presentation (audio, video) were varied. The defendant displaying a low level, as opposed to a higher level of emotion was perceived as more guilty and less credible. In Experiment 2, using only the video mode, emotion level and evidence strength (strong, weak) were varied. Defendant emotion level tended to affect jurors' decisions only when the evidence against the defendant was weak (i.e., a stronger display of emotion was associated with a lower proportion of guilty verdicts, shorter sentence assignments, and perceptions of a more honest defendant). Path analyses for both experiments indicate that the effects of emotion on perceived guilt level are mediated by perceptions of the defendant (e.g., the defendant's level of honesty). Implications of using defendant emotion level for determining guilt are discussed.     

Stability of Self-Esteem: Assessment, Correlates, and Excuse Making

We examined stability and level of self-esteem as predictors of excuse making; the extent to which self-ratings of stability are related to a statistical index of self-esteem stability; and the relations between stability and certainty of self-esteem and a variety of other psychological constructs. Regarding excuse making, our findings indicated that for high self-esteem individuals, instability was related to greater excuse making following success, but not following failure. However, for low self-esteem individuals, instability was related to greater excuse making following failure, but not following success. Other findings indicated that self-ratings of stability were only minimally related to a statistical measure of stability based on repeated assessments of self-esteem obtained in naturalistic contexts. Finally, stability of self-esteem was not significantly correlated with certainty of self-esteem. In addition, the pattern of correlations that emerged between certainty and other constructs suggested that uncertainty reflects the phenomenal experience of a tenuous self-view. On the other hand, stability of self-esteem appears to reflect the extent to which one's self-view is malleable, which may not be completely available to conscious awareness. Our discussion focuses on the nature of self-esteem stability and the roles of stability and level of self-esteem in reactions to evaluative events.     

How type of excuse defense, mock juror age, and defendant age affect mock jurors' decisions

The authors investigated the effects of mock juror age (younger vs. older), defendant age (22 vs. 65), and type of excuse defense used by defendants (a highly self-inflicted condition, Cocaine Dependency Disorder, vs. a less self-inflicted condition, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder) on mock juror decisions. Ninety-six younger and 96 older adults read a scenario and answered a questionnaire. Results indicated that the defendant using the highly self-inflicted excuse was more likely to receive a guilty verdict and a longer sentence than was the defendant using the less self-inflicted excuse. Older jurors were more certain of their verdicts and saw the defendant as more responsible for his condition than did younger jurors. Defendant age did not affect juror decisions. In addition, excuse type and juror age affected the jurors' perceptions of the victim's responsibility for the attack. The authors discuss the potential influence of juror age on perceptions of defendant responsibility.