The role of discrete emotional reactions to child sexual abuse (CSA) testimony in mock juror decision-making

Abstract

ABSTRACT Child sexual abuse (CSA) cases often involve graphic descriptions of abuse. Jurors may experience emotional reactions to this type of evidence, which may impact decision making. Two studies were conducted to understand mock jurors’ emotions in response to children’s testimony about alleged CSA, how emotions relate to moral outrage, objective verdict decisions, sentence recommendations, and witness evaluations. Jury-eligible participants (Study 1 N = 143, Study 2 N = 169) reported their emotions (i.e. anger, sadness, and disgust) before and after exposure to child testimony in a CSA case, and then provided case decisions (i.e. verdict decision, verdict confidence, sentencing length) and reported moral outrage. Participants experienced increases in all emotions from pre to post transcript, with the greatest increase in disgust. Moral outrage mediated the relationship between disgust and sentencing recommendations (Study 1 & 2), and between disgust and credibility ratings (Study 2). These studies reveal that CSA cases elicit negative emotions in jurors and emotions predict more punitive decision-making, posing a concern for objectivity.