Abstract
ABSTRACT The predominant theories on courtroom decision-making explain extralegal disparities with the courtroom actors’ use of stereotypes. We conducted a vignette study on a sample of judges at the Chinese National Judges College, manipulated the sex of the defendant in each vignette, then asked the subjects for the recommended sentence. The survey also contained a series of questions on the beliefs about the causes of crime, the patterns of criminal behaviors, and the effectiveness of punishment. We found that the judges recommended significantly less harsh sentences for the female homicide defendant, but recommended significantly harsher sentences for both female defrauding and drug trafficking defendants. We also found little evidence that the perception and belief variables were confounders behind the observed sex disparities.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
