Simulated Jurors Research Articles

Examining Sex- and Sexuality-Based Bias in Punitive Attitudes Toward Offenders Convicted of Intimate Partner Crimes: A Vignette Experiment

This experimental vignette study used nationally representative survey data ( n = 841) to examine the effects of perpetrator sex and sexuality and victim sex on simulated juror punitivity and sentencing recommendations for individuals convicted of aggravated assault and domestic abuse. Results show participants recommended longer sentences and higher fines for male than for female offenders, and for those who victimized women than for those who victimized men, suggesting the effects of jurorbias on punitive attitudes are influenced by offender and victim sex. However, the effects of offender sexuality were insignificant in modeling. Path analysis showed that sex differences found in baseline models were partially explained by stigmatization (i.e., perceptions of dangerousness, fatalism blame, and social distance) hypothetical jurors attached to offenders.

Perceived Dangerousness Mediates Punitive Attitudes Toward Sex Offenders: Results From a Vignette Experiment

The current study used an experimental vignette ( n = 1,093) to examine the effects of perpetrator sex and age, and victim sex and age, on simulated juror sentencing recommendations for individuals convicted of sexual offenses (ICSO). Path analyses were used to see if differences in punitive attitudes could be explained by perceptions of dangerousness participants attached to experimentally manipulated variables, as hypothesized by attribution theorists. Results show that participants consistently recommended longer sentences, higher fines, and indicated greater support for post-release sanctions for male offenders, older perpetrators, and for offenders who victimized younger adolescents. Path analysis demonstrated that perceptions of dangerousness partially mediated the relationship between experimentally manipulated predictor variables and recommended sentence length, providing partial support for attribution theory.

Confirmatory Information Processing in Legal Decision: Effect of Intimate Conviction

A large body of research has focused on legal decision-making in mixed courts of lay and professional judges. However, few studies have been conducted to test the impact on evidence processing of the intimate conviction instruction (ICI), a decision rule based on impression formation used in civil law systems. The influence of the two facets of the ICI (the decision rule and the motivation requirement) on confirmatory information processing (CIP) was studied in a harm-to-person case. Using a methodology combining the simulated juror and CIP paradigms, the decision rule (based on impression vs. rationality) and the motivation requirement (required vs. not required) were manipulated to observe their impact on assimilation and selective exposure biases. Results showed significant interactions of the two facets of the ICI but only on the assimilation bias. These results are discussed in the light of the evidence processes in the context of legal decision-making in criminal courts.

The influence of a defendant’s body weight on perceptions of guilt

To investigate the influence of a defendant's weight on simulated jurors' perceptions of guilt. Participants were 471 lean and overweight adults (mean body mass index: 25.34±5.91) who read a vignette describing a case of check fraud while viewing one of four images of the alleged defendant (a lean male, a lean female, an obese male or an obese female). Participants rated the defendant's culpability on a 5-point Likert scale and completed measures of anti-fat attitudes. Male respondents endorsed greater overall weight bias than females (F (1470)=23.815, P<0.01, η(2)=0.048). A three-way interaction was detected between participant sex, defendant sex and defendant weight on perceptions of guilt such that when the defendant was female, male participants were significantly more likely to find her guilty if she was obese than if she was lean (guilt ratings=4.05±0.83; 3.31±1.03, respectively; F(1467)=5.935, P=0.015, R(2)=0.060). In addition, lean male participants were significantly more likely to believe that the obese female defendant met criteria for check fraud, and indicated greater belief she would be a repeat offender, compared with the lean female defendant (t(90)=2.081, P=0.040; t(90)=2.395 P=0.019, respectively). There were no differences in perceptions of guilt or responsibility between the obese male and the lean male defendants. The results of this novel study indicate that both weight and gender of a defendant may affect juror perceptions of guilt and responsibility.

Battered Women Who Kill: Variables Affecting Simulated Jurors' Verdicts

The present experiment investigated the effects of situational, participant and defendant variables on simulated jurors' verdicts in a case where a battered woman has killed her abuser. One-hundred thirty male and female undergraduates from multicultural and African American samples read a trial transcript in which the battered woman was either Caucasian or African American, and had been either physically or emotionally abused. The hypothesis that the defendant would be judged guilty more often in the emotional abuse case was confirmed. No significant differences were found between African American and Caucasian defendants, and between male and female participants, innumber of guilty verdicts. Male participants, and those who had no personal experience with domestic violence, showed significantly less knowledge of the battering situation. Situational factors, such as type of abuse, rather than defendant or participant variables, such as gender, race or prior knowledge, affected number of guilty verdicts.

The Effects of Race and Social Dominance Orientation in Simulated Juror Decision Making1

Recent mock-jury research often has found no evidence that White jurors are more likely to convict and impose harsher sentences on Black compared to White defendants. Drawing on social dominance theory (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999), this paper argues that this apparent null effect reflects that different racial biases shown by White jurors varying in social dominance orientation (SDO) cancel each other out. A mock-jury study (n= 70) found no main effect for defendant race, but evidence for a crossover interaction with high SDO individuals showing an anti-Black bias and with low SDO individuals showing a pro-Black bias in their guilty judgments and sentence recommendations. The discussion argues race is still a critical factor in White jurors’ decision making.

Judgmental Biases Produced by Instructions to Disregard: The (Paradoxical) Case of Emotional Information

Two studies examined the consequences of instructing people to ignore emotionally charged information. Hypotheses were examined in the context of simulated juror decision making Results indicate that emotional information is more difficult to ignore than nonemotional information and that efforts to ignore such information can magnify its influence on related judgments. Thus, for participants exposed to emotionally charged incriminating evidence, the impact of this evidence was enhanced by instructions to disregard it. This paradoxical effect of disregard instructions was not observed for participants presented with otherwise equivalent, nonemotional evidence. Findings extend research on thought suppression and social judgment by suggesting that rebound effects may be more pronounced when information is emotional in nature. They also bridge a gap between the two literatures by suggesting that suppression-induced hyper accessibility of thoughts can lead to systematic biases not only in the quantity of cognitive responding but also in the content of judgments.

Factors affecting simulated jurors' decisions in capital cases

Abstract Previous psycho-legal research has claimed that the process of selecting death-qualified jurors for capital cases creates conviction-prone juries. The studies on which these claims are based have employed simulation methodologies to examine the relationship between subjects' death-penalty attitudes and verdict decisions, as well as the effect of the death-qualifying voir dire itself. Despite admitted weaknesses of simulations in general, this method was employed in the present research so that conceptual comparisons to past findings could be drawn. Two experiments were designed to examine the issue of death-qualification and biased juries in a context of other potentially highly influential factors, namely, the strength of evidence and the degree of heinousness. Our results failed to find any of the relationships between death-penalty attitudes and verdict decisions that would be predicted from past research. Instead, the subjects' decisions were influenced, virtually exclusively, by the strength...

Effect of Crime Seriousness on Simulated Jurors' Use of Inadmissible Evidence

The effect of crime seriousness on American student jurors' use of inadmissible evidence was examined. Previous research has shown that sometimes simulated jurors disregard inadmissible evidence, and sometimes they do not. Various factors have been investigated in an attempt to account for these mixed results (reactance, direction of the inadmissible evidence, objections, and rulings). In the present study, students read a brief trial summary of a crime that was low, intermediate, or high in seriousness (vandalism, arson, or murder). Half of the sample was exposed to ambiguous evidence, and the other half was exposed to damaging, inadmissible evidence. Across crimes, all factors were held constant except for descriptions of the crimes themselves. Only when the crime was not serious were students biased by the inadmissible evidence. Crime seriousness was positively correlated with guilt judgments when the evidence was ambiguous, but not when damaging inadmissible evidence was added.

Ambiguity and Guilt Determinations: A Modern Racism Perspective1

Studies documenting the existence of prejudice in simulated juror ratings of guilt may not be directly generalizable to legal applications due to a failure to include jury instructions. Jury instructions specifying the conditions required to find a defendant guilty may serve to dissipate juror's overt prejudices. In order to investigate this hypothesis, participants read a transcript of a trial in which the race of the victim and the defendant were varied. In addition, half the participants were given jury instructions which specified the elements of the crime, and noted that in order to find the defendant guilty each element had to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Participants were then asked to rate the guilt of the defendant. Results replicated earlier studies which found that participants overwhelmingly rate black defendants guiltier than white defendants, especially when the victim is white. However, these differences disappeared when participants were provided with jury instructions. The findings are discussed with regard to the theory of modern racism.

Attributions for Blue‐Collar and White‐Collar Crime: The Effects of Subject and Defendant Race on Simulated Juror Decisions1

Ninety‐six undergraduate and graduate students participated in a study that examined the effects of subject and defendant race on attributions made for a blue‐collar (burglary) and a white‐collar (embezzlement) crime. It was predicted that attributions for race stereotypic defendants (e.g., a white embezzler) would be internal (dispositional), that attributions for race nonstereotypic defendants (e.g., a black embezzler) would be external, and that attributions would be related to jail sentences. Subjects were randomly assigned to receive one of four crime descriptions that varied in terms of defendant race (black or white) and type of crime (burglary or embezzlement) committed. Subjects were subsequently asked to recommend jail sentences and to respond to items regarding the probable cause of the defendant's behavior. As predicted, race stereotypic crimes were perceived as being due to internal factors and the hypothesized relationship between attributions and jail sentences received partial support. The application of attributional models to the study of juror decision‐ making is discussed.

Perceptions of Blue-Collar and White-Collar Crime: The Effect of Defendant Race on Simulated Juror Decisions

Abstract Undergraduate students (N = 56) participated in a study designed to examine the effect of defendant race and type of crime on simulated juror decisions. An equal number of black and white students was randomly assigned to receive one of four crime descriptions that varied in terms of defendant race (black or white) and the type of crime (burglary or embezzlement) committed. Students were subsequently asked to recommend jail sentences and bail amounts and to respond to items regarding the perceived severity of the crime and the likelihood that the defendant would repeat the crime. As predicted, the white embezzler received longer jail sentences than the black embezzler, and the black burglar received longer jail sentences than the white burglar.

When a child takes the stand: Jurors' perceptions of children's eyewitness testimony.

Children testify in courts of law, yet little is known about jurors' reactions to them. We describe the first studies of simulated jurors' reactions to child as compared to adult witnesses. Our methodology involved exposing mock jurors to trial descriptions. In the descriptions, the age of the eyewitness who provided crucial testimony varied. Across three experiments, potential jurors judged children to be less credible eyewitnesses than adults. Eyewitness age did not, however, determine the degree of guilt attributed to the defendant. This same pattern of results was found regardless of the sample tested (college students versus a more heterogeneous group), the type of trial presented (vehicular homicide versus murder), or the medium employed (written trial descriptions versus videotaped mock trial). Our findings indicate that biases against children's credibility are likely to appear when a child bystander witness takes the stand.

Prejudicial Joinder of Multiple Offenses: Relative Effects of Cognitive Processing and Criminal Schema

The relative contributions of cognitive processing of evidence and invocation of a criminal schema to the effects of joinder of offenses was investigated. One hundred forty simulated jurors either judged no evidence or judged evidence from one or two charges with the knowledge that the defendant had been charged with either one, two, three, or four offenses. The results showed that guilt evaluations, defendant character ratings, and measures of memory were influenced more by the number of charges judged than by the number of charges filed. Results from two path analyses suggest that the joinder effect is mediated by both cognitive factors and judgments about the defendant's character. Joinder appears to affect the cognitions generated about the cases, which in turn affect perceptions of the defendant and ultimately guilt assessment.

Habla Ingles? The Effects of Language Translation on Simulated Juror Decisions1

Two studies were conducted in which college students, acting as simulated jurors, heard the testimony of a defendant in an assault case. The testimony was presented in English or in another language (Spanish in Study 1 and Thai in Study 2) which was translated into English by an interpreter. In Study 1, non‐Hispanics judged the defendant to be more guilty than did Hispanics when the defendant's testimony was presented in Spanish than when it was presented in English. This bias was offset when the judge's instructions admonished the jurors to ignore the fact that the defendant's testimony was translated. Similarly, in Study 2, subjects (all non‐Thai) judged the defendent more guilty when his testimony was presented in Thai than when it was presented in English. Again, this bias was eliminated by the judge's instructions to the jurors to ignore the fact that the testimony was translated. The increased guilty verdicts for defendants who did not testify in English appeared to be due to prejudice and language ethnocentrism, the belief that defendants in U.S. courts should speak English.

Attributions of responsibility by simulated jurors: stage of moral reasoning and guilt by association.

Simulated jurors (91 male and 116 female undergraduates) judged the guilt of and assigned the sentence for a defendant in an ambiguous murder case. Severity of crime and sentence decreased significantly with increasing stage of moral reasoning. The addition of evidence interpretable as guilt by association produced less severe guilt and sentence decisions at the preconventional and conventional stages. Results were discussed in light of numerous person-perception ratings of the victim and defendant.

Effects of Authoritarian, Anti-Authoritarian, and Egalitarian Legal Attitudes on Mock Juror and Jury Decisions

The effects of authoritarian, anti-authoritarian, and egalitarian legal attitudes on verdicts by simulated jurors and juries were investigated. 360 undergraduate students in introductory psychology were classified as authoritarian, anti-authoritarian, or egalitarian in their legal attitudes on the basis of responses to the Legal Attitudes Questionnaire. An equal number (120) of each juror type was selected. They were grouped into six-person homogeneous mock juries and asked to render an individual decision prior to deliberation, an individual post-deliberation verdict, and a group decision. Prior to deliberation the authoritarian student jurors responded more punitively toward a defendant to whom they were similar. The deliberation process exerted a moderating influence, and the egalitarian student jurors were especially susceptible to this influence. Finally similarity to the defendant was the most salient factor in determining the decision, and student juries were significantly more punitive toward a defendant who was similar to them in race and socio-economic status.

Witnesses and Their Testimony: Effects of Ordering on Juror Verdicts1

Thibaut and Walker's claim that criminal courtroom proceedings are subject to pervasive recency effects was experimentally investigated. Previous research on order effects in a legal setting is critically reviewed; it is argued that this research fails to provide adequate simulation of courtroom protocol. An experiment was designed to retain the structure of a criminal trial while manipulating witness and testimony order. In contrast to earlier research, primacy effects were found. The greatest number of guilty verdicts by simulated jurors occurred when the strongest “guilty” witnesses and “guilty” testimony by these witnesses came first. These results are discussed with respect to (a) witness and testimony order, (b) length of case, and (c) type of case used.

Impact on Simulated Jurors of Testimony as a Function of Non-Evidential Characteristics of Witness and Defendant

The impact on jurors' decision making of the non-evidential characteristics of witnesses' and defendant's attractiveness and the agreement of their testimony was explored in a 2 × 2 × 2 between-subjects factorial design. 48 undergraduates read a summary of a courtroom trial in which an eyewitness, who was either a professional (High Attractive) or laborer (Low Attractive), either agreed or disagreed with the testimony of a defendant whose character had been assessed positively (High Attractive) or negatively (Low Attractive). Dependent variables were subjects' verdicts and confidence in the witnesses' and defendant's testimony. Conflict in testimony between the witness and defendant led to higher ratings of guilt but lowered the subject's confidence in the testimony of both. A significant interaction of witness × defendant × testimony showed that ratings of guilt decreased when a witness testified against a defendant who was dissimilar in attractiveness; an unattractive witness supporting an attractive defendant also reduced assessment of guilt but an attractive witness who testified for an unattractive defendant increased findings of guilt. Results were discussed in the context of relevant research involving simulated jurors.

Juror-defendant similarity and the assessment of guilt in politically motivated crimes

This study examined the effect of political similarity between a defendant and simulated jurors on the subjects' assessment of guilt and recommendation of sentence in a political crime. Subjects read evidence presented at two political trials, one a terrorist bombing and the other a politically motivated burglary. In both crimes, the defendant was sometimes identified as a radical leftist and sometimes identified as a member of the radical right. Subjects then rendered verdicts, recommended sentences, and answered questions about their own beliefs. It was found that as objective similarity increased, the probability of finding the defendant guilty decreased in the political burglary (a crime in which there was no loss of life). This effect was not observed in the terrorist bombing (a crime in which there was loss of life). In both crimes there was a tendency for similarity to lead to more punitive sentences when the subject was convinced of the defendant's guilt.