The effects of defendant race, victim race, and juror gender on evidence processing in a murder trial

Behavioral Sciences and the Law

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 179-198

  ForsterLee, Robert ^a   ForsterLee, Lynne ^a   Horowitz, Irwin A ^b   King, Ellen ^a  

^a CENTRAL QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COURT; CRIMINAL JUSTICE; EMOTIONALITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; OFFENDER; PUBLIC OPINION; PUNISHMENT; RACE DIFFERENCE; RACISM; SEX DIFFERENCE; VICTIM;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AFRICAN CONTINENTAL ANCESTRY GROUP; AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; COGNITION; CRIME VICTIMS; DECISION MAKING; EUROPEAN CONTINENTAL ANCESTRY GROUP; FEMALE; HOMICIDE; HUMANS; MALE; MENTAL RECALL; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PREJUDICE; PRISONERS; QUEENSLAND;

EID: 33646253428     PISSN: 07353936     EISSN: 10990798     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bsl.675     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2001). Year Book Australia 2002: Population. Retrieved January 2, 2005, from http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/ abs@nsf/94713ad445ff1425ca25682000192af2/ 957a70f6f5498421ca2568a900154937!OpenDocument
2. Baldus, D. C., Woodworth, G., Zuckerman, D., Weiner, N. A., & Broffitt, B. (1998). Racial discrimination and the death penalty in the post-Furman era: An empirical and legal overview, with recent findings from Philadelphia. Cornell Law Review, 83, 1638-1661.
3. Bargh, J. A., & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The unbearable automaticity of being. American Psychologist, 54, 462-479.
4. Bartol, C. R., & Bartol, A. M. (1994). Psychology and law: Research and application. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
5. Batson v. Kentucky. 476 U.S. 79 (1986).
6. Bernard, J. L. (1979). Interaction between the race of the defendant and that of the jurors in determining verdicts. Law and Psychology Review, 5, 103-111.
7. Bodenhausen, G. V. (1988). Stereotypic biases in social decision-making and memory: Testing process models of stereotype use. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 726-737.
8. Bodenhausen, G. V., & Lichtenstein, M. (1987). Social stereotypes and information-processing strategies: The impact of task complexity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 871-881.
9. Bray, R. H., & Kerr, N. L. (1982). Methodological considerations in the study of psychology of the courtroom. In N. L. Kerr, & R. M. Bray (Eds.), The psychology of the courtroom (pp. 287-323). New York: Academic.
10. Brigham, J. C., & Wasserman, A. W. (1999). The impact of race, racial attitude, and gender on reactions to the criminal trial of O.J. Simpson. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 1333-1370.
11. Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752-766.
12. Chaiken, S., & Stangor, C. (1987). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 575-630.
13. Chen, S., Schlechter, D., & Chaiken, S. (1996). Getting at the truth or getting along: Accuracy- versus impression-motivated heuristic and systematic processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 262-276.
14. Costanzo, S., & Costanzo, M. (1994). Life or death decisions: An analysis of capital jury decision making under the special issues sentencing framework. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 151-170.
15. Crowley, M. J., O'Callaghan, M. G., & Ball, P. J. (1994). The juridical impact of psychological expert testimony in a simulated child sexual abuse trial. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 89-105.
16. Dann, B. M., & Hans, V. P. (2004). Recent evaluative research on jury trial innovations. Court Review, 41(1), 12-19. Retrieved April 18, 2005, from http://aja.ncsc.dni.us/courtrv/review.html
17. Davis, J. H., Kerr, N. L., Atkin, R. S., Holt, R., & Meek, D. (1975). The decision processes of 6 and 12-person mock juries assigned unanimous and two-thirds majority rules. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 1-14.
18. Devine, D. J., Clayton, L. D., Dunford, B. B., Seying, R., & Pryce, J. (2000). Jury decision-making: 45 years of empirical research on deliberating groups. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 73, 622-727.
19. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
20. Eisenberg, N., & Lennon, R. (1983). Sex differences in empathy and related capacities. Psychological Bulletin, 94, 100-131.
21. Feather, N. T., & Souter, J. (2002). Reactions to mandatory sentences in relation to the ethnic identity and criminal history of the offender. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 417-438.
22. Foley, L. A., & Chamblin, M. H. (1982). The effect of race and personality on mock jurors' decisions. Journal of Psychology, 112, 47-51.
23. ForsterLee, L., Horowitz, I. A., ForsterLee, R., King, K., & Ronlund, L. (1999). Death penalty attitudes and juror decisions in Australia. Australian Psychologist, 34, 1-6.
24. Gabora, N. J., Spanos, N. P., & Joab, A. (1993). The effects of complainant age and expert psychological testimony in a simulated child sexual abuse trial. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 103-119.
25. Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1986). Prejudice, discrimination and racism: Theory and research. Orlando, FL: Academic.
26. Giner-Sorolla, R., & Chaiken, S. (1997). Selective use of heuristic and systematic processing under defense motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 84-98.
27. Haney, C., Sontag, L., & Costanzo, S. (1994). Deciding to take a life: Capital juries, sentencing instructions, and the jurisprudence of death. Journal of Social Issues, 50(2), 149-176.
28. Hastie, R., Penrod, S., & Pennington, N. (1983). Inside the jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
29. Ho, R., ForsterLee, L., & ForsterLee, R. (2004). The impact of justice and vengeance motives on sentencing decisions. In S. P. Shohov (Ed.), Advances in psychology research (Vol. 28, pp. 165-183). New York: Nova.
30. Honeyman, J. C., & Ogloff, J. R. P. (1996). Capital punishment: Arguments for life and death. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 28. Retrieved April 17, 2005, from http://www.cpa.ca/ogloff.htm
31. Jones, C., & Aronson, E. (1973). Attribution of fault in a rape victim as a function of the respectability of the victim. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 282-294.
32. Joseph, R. E. (1936). Memorandum for Mr. Tolson. Retrieved on January 1, 2005, from http://foia.fbi.gov/ darrow.htm
33. Kalven, H., & Zeisel, H. (1966). The American jury. Boston: Little Brown.
34. Kanekar, S., & Vaz, L. (1984). Attributions of causal and moral responsibility to a victim of rape. Australian Journal of Psychology, 30, 351-358.
35. Kasian, M., Spanos, N. P., Terrance, C. A., & Peebles, S. (1993). Battered women who kill: Jury simulation and legal defenses. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 289-312.
36. Kerr, N. L., Aitken, R., Stasser, G., Meek, D., Holt, R., & Davis, J. (1976). Guilt beyond a reasonable doubt: Effects of concept definition and assigned rule on the judgments of mock jurors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 282-294.
37. Kerr, N. L., & Bray, R. (2005). Simulation, realism, and the jury. In N. Brewer, & K. D. Williams, Psychology and law (pp. 322-364). New York: Guilford.
38. Kerr, N. L., Hymes, R. W., Anderson, A. B., & Weathers, J. E. (1995). Defendant-juror similarity and mock juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 545-568.
39. Kerr, N. L., Niedermeier, K. E., & Kaplan, M. P. (1999). Bias in jurors v. bias in juries: New evidence from an SDS perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 80, 70-86.
40. Kerr, N. L., & Turner-Kurtz, A. (1977). Effect of a victim's suffering and respectability on mock juror judgments: Further evidence on the just world theory. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 8, 42-56.
41. Klein, S. P., & Rolph, J. E. (1991). Relationship of offender and victim race to death sentences in California. Jurimetrics, 32, 33-48.
42. Lee, C. K. Y. (1998). Race and the victim: An examination of capital sentencing and guilt attribution studies. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 73, 533-584.
43. Lenny, E. (1977). Women's self-confidence in achievement settings. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 1-13.
44. Luginbuhl, J., & Mullin, C. (1981). Rape and responsibility: How and how much is the victim blamed? Sex Roles, 7, 547-559.
45. MacCoun, R. J. (1987). Getting inside the black box: Towards a better understanding of civil jury behavior. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
46. Maheswaran, D., & Chaiken, S. (1991). Promoting systematic processing in low motivation settings: Effects of incongruent information on processing and judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 13-25.
47. McCleskey v. Kemp (1987). CALL (en banc) 753 F. 2d 877.
48. Meyers-Levy, J., & Maheswaran, D. (1991). Exploring differences in males and females processing strategies. Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 63-70.
49. Meyers-Levy, J., & Sternthal, B. (1991). Gender differences in the use of message cues and judgments. Journal of Marketing Research, 28, 84-96.
50. Miller, M., & Hewitt, J. (1978). Conviction of a defendant as a function of juror-victim racial similarity. Journal of Social Psychology, 105, 159-160.
51. Miller, N., Maruyama, G., Beaber, R. J., & Valone, K. (1976). Speed of speech and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 159-160.
52. Nagao, D. H., & Ross, L. (1980). Some implications of temporal drift in social parameters. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 479-496.
53. Niedermeier, K., Horowitz, I. A., & Kerr, N. L. (1999). Informing jurors of their nullification power: A route to a just verdict or judicial chaos? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 331-352.
54. Pedersen, A., & Walker, I. (1997). Prejudice against Australian Aborigines: Old- fashioned and modern forms. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 561-587.
55. Petty, R. E., Fleming, M. A., & White, P. H. (1999). Stigmatized sources and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 19-34.
56. Pfeifer, J. E., & Ogloff, J. R. (1991). Ambiguity and guilty determinations: A modern racism perspective. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 1713-1725.
57. Pomerantz, E. M., Chaiken, S., & Tordesillas, R. S. (1995). Attitude strength and resistance processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 408-419.
58. Ratneshwar, S., & Chaiken, S. (1991). Comprehension's role in persuasion: The case of its moderating effect on the persuasive impact of source cues. Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 52-62.
59. Schkade, D., Sunstein, C. R., & Kahneman, D. (1999). Deliberating about dollars: The seventy shift. Retrieved April 18, 2005, from University of Chicago, Law School site: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/ Publications/Working/ index.html
60. Schkade, D., Sunstein, C. R., & Kahneman, D. (2000). Are juries less erratic than individuals? Deliberation, polarization, and punitive damages. Retrieved April 19, 2005, from University of Chicago, Law School site: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/Publications/Working/index.html
61. Scutt, J. A. (1997). Judicial bias: Confronting prejudice in the courtroom. In S. Cook, & J. Bessant (Eds.), Women's encounters with violence: Australian experiences (pp. 89-108). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
62. Shaw, J. I., & Skolnick, P. (1995). Effects of prohibitive and informative judicial instructions on jury decision-making. Social Behavior and Personality, 23, 319-326.
63. Sommers, S. R., & Ellsworth, P. C. (2000). Race in the courtroom: Perceptions of guilt and dispositional attributions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1367-1379.
64. Sommers, S. R., & Ellsworth, P. C. (2001). White juror bias: An investigation of prejudice against Black defendants in the American courtroom. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 201-229.
65. Sommers, S. R., & Ellsworth, P. C. (2003). How much do we really know about race and juries? A review of social science theory and research. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 78, 997-1031.
66. Villemur, N. K., & Hyde, J. S. (1983). Effects of sex and defense attorney, sex of juror, and age and attractiveness of the victim on mock juror decision-making in a rape case. Sex Roles, 9, 879-889.
67. Wegener, D. T., Kerr, N. L., Fleming, M. A., & Petty, R. E. (2001). Flexible corrections of juror judgments: Implications for jury instructions. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 6, 629-654.
68. Weiner, R. L., & Stolle, P. (1997). Trial consulting: Jurors' and attorneys' perceptions of murder. California Western Law Review, 34, 225-248.
69. White, P. H., & Harkins, S. G. (1994). Race of source effects in the elaboration likelihood model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 790-807.