Abstract
Abstract Participants read standard informed consent statements. Half of the participants, the prebriefed group, read statements alerting them to the possibility that they might be intentionally misinformed. All participants then read a series of arguments summarizing the transcripts of an actual rape trial and rated the extent of defendant and complainant responsabilites. Half of the participants were misinformed concerning the correct outcome of the trial. Although the defendant was actually convicted, half of the participants were told before they read the summaries that the verdict was guilty, and half were told that it was not guilty. Attributions of responsibility and evaluations of culpability were compared to measure the effects of prebriefing. Effects found for the verdict manipulation were unaffected by the prebriefing information.
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.
