Jurors' locus of control and defendants' attractiveness in death penalty sentencing

Journal of Social Psychology

Volumn 147, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 285-298

  Beckham, Crystal M ^a   Spray, Beverly J ^a,b   Pietz, Christina A ^a  

^a Forest Institute   (United States)

^b Forest Institute of Professional Psychology   (United States)

Author keywords

Defendants; Gender differences; Locus of control; Mock jury decisions; Physical attractiveness

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROL; FEMALE; HUMAN; JURISPRUDENCE; LEGAL ASPECT; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PUNISHMENT; SOCIAL DESIRABILITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CAPITAL PUNISHMENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNAL-EXTERNAL CONTROL; JUDICIAL ROLE; JURISPRUDENCE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SOCIAL DESIRABILITY;

EID: 34548282952     PISSN: 00224545     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3200/SOCP.147.3.285-298     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Abramson, L. Y., Seligman, M. E. P., & Teasdale, J. D. (1978). Learned helplessness of humans: critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 49-74.
2. Abwender, D. A., & Hough, K. (2001). Interactive effects of characteristics of defendant and mock juror on U.S. participants'judgment and sentencing recommendations. The Journal of Social Psychology, 141, 603-615.
3. Ackerman, A. M., McMahon, P. M., & Fehr, L. A. (1984). Defendant characteristics and judgment behaviors of adolescent mock jurors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 13, 123-130.
4. Barnett, N. J., & Feild, H. S. (1978). Character of the defendant and length of sentence in rape and burglary crimes. The Journal of Social Psychology, 104, 271-277.
5. Benassi, M. A. (1982). Effects of order of presentation, primacy, and physical attractiveness on attributions of ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 48-58.
6. Burke, D. M., Ames, M. A., Etherington, R., & Pietsch, J. (1990). Effects of victim's and defendant's physical attractiveness on the perception of responsibility in an ambiguous domestic violence case. Journal of Family Violence, 5, 199-207.
7. Cash, T. F., & Begley, P. J. (1976), Internal-external control, achievement orientation, and physical attractiveness of college students. Psychological Reports, 38, 1205-1206.
8. Castellow, W. A., Wuensch, K. L., & Moore, C. H. (1990). Effects of physical attractiveness of the plaintiff and defendant in sexual harassment judgments. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5, 547-562.
9. Chia, R. C., Allred, L. J., Grossnickle, W. F., & Lee, G. W. (1998). Effects of attractiveness and gender on the perception of achievement-related variables. The Journal of Social Psychology, 138, 471-477.
10. Dion, K. K., & Berscheid, E. (1974). Physical attractiveness and peer perception among children. Sociometry, 37, 1-12.
11. Eagley, A. H., Ashmore, R. D., Makhijani, M. G., & Longo, L. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but ... : A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 109-128.
12. Efran, M. G. (1974). The effects of physical appearance on the judgment of guilt, interpersonal attraction, and severity of recommended punishment in a simulated jury task. Journal of Research in Personality, 8, 45-54.
13. Egbert, J. M., Jr., Moore, C. H., Wuensch, K. L., & Castellow, W. A. (1992). The effect of litigant social desirability on judgments regarding a sexual harassment case. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 7, 569-579.
14. Feingold, A. (1992). Good-looking people are not what we think. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 304-341.
15. Fischer, G. J. (1997). Gender effects on individual verdicts and on mock jury verdicts in a simulated acquaintance rape trial. Sex Roles, 36, 491-501.
16. Friend, R. M., & Vinson, M. (1974). Leaning over backwards: Jurors' responses to defendants' attractiveness. Journal of Communication, 24, 124-129.
17. Gerbasi, K. C., Zuckerman, M., & Reis, H. T. (1977). Justice needs a new blindfold: a review of mock jury research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 323-345.
18. Gonzalez-Perez, M. (2001). A model of decisionmaking in capital juries. International Social Science Review, 76, 79-91.
19. Hochreich, D. J. (1975a). Defensive externality and blame projection following failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 540-546.
20. Hochreich, D. J. (1975b). Sex-role stereotypes for internal-external control and interpersonal trust. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 273.
21. Howard, J. A., & Levinson, R. (1985). The overdue courtship of attribution and labeling, Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 191-202.
22. Izzett, R., & Fishman, L. (1976). Defendant sentences as a function of attractiveness and justification for actions. The Journal of Social Psychology, 100, 285-290.
23. Kerr, N. L., Bull, R. H. C., MacCoun, R. J., & Rathborn, H. (1985). Effects of victim attractiveness, care and disfigurement on the judgements of American and British mock jurors, British Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 47-58.
24. Kramer, G. P., & Kerr, N. L. (1989). Laboratory simulation and bias in the study of jury behavior: A methodological note. Law and Human Behavior, 13, 89-99.
25. Kulka, R. A., & Kessler, J. B. (1978), Is justice really blind?-The influence of litigant physical attractiveness on juridical judgment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 8, 366-381.
26. Leventhal, G., & Krate, R. (1977). Physical attractiveness and severity of sentencing. Psychological Reports, 40, 315-318.
27. Lockhart v. McCree, 476 U.S. 162 (1986).
28. Mazzella, R., & Feingold, A. (1994). The effects of physical attractiveness, race, socioeconomic status, and gender of defendants and victims on judgments of mock jurors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1315-1344.
29. Moore, C. H., Wuensch, K. L., Hedges, R. M., & Castellow, W. A. (1994). The effects of physical attractiveness and social desirability on judgments regarding a sexual harassment case. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 9, 715-730.
30. Osborne, Y H., Rappaport, N. B., & Meyer, R. G. (1986). An investigation of persuasion and sentencing severity with mock juries. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 4, 339-349.
31. Phares, E. J., & Lamiell, J. T. (1975). Internal-external control, interpersonal judgments of others in need, and attribution of responsibility. Journal of Personality, 43, 23-28.
32. Piehl, J. (1977). Integration of information in the "courts:" Influence of physical attractiveness on amount of punishment for a traffic offender. Psychological Reports, 41, 551-556.
33. Pope, J., & Meyer, R. (1999). An attributional analysis of jurors'judgments in a criminalcase: A preliminary investigation. Social Behavior and Personality, 27, 563-574.
34. Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs; General and Applied, 80(1, Whole No. 609).
35. Rotter, J. B. ( 1990). Internal versus external control of reinforcement: A case history of a variable. American Psychologist, 45. 489-493.
36. Rotter, J. B. (1992). Some comments on the "cognates of personal control." Applied and Preventive Psychology, 1, 127-129.
37. Rowland, J. K. ( 1991 ). Loeus-of-control and juror attributions of comparative negligence. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52 (12), 4147A. (UMI No. 9210109)
38. Seligman, C., Brickman, J., & Koulack, D. (1977). Rape and physical attractiveness: Assigning responsibility to victims. Journal of Personality, 45, 554-563.
39. Sigall, H., & Ostrove, N. (1975). Beautiful but dangerous: Effects of offender attractiveness and nature of crime on juridic judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 410-414.
40. Smith, E. D., & Hed, A. (1979). Effects of offenders' age and attractiveness on sentencing by mock juries. Psychological Reports, 44, 691-694.
41. Stephan, C., & Tully, J. C., (1977). The influence of physical attractiveness of a plaintiff on the decisions of simulated jurors. The Journal of Social Psychology, 101, 149-150.
42. Stevick, R. A., Dixon, P. N., & Willingham, W. K. (1980). Locus of control and behavioral versus self-response measures of social interest. Journal of Individual Psychology, 36, 183-189.
43. Stewart, J. E. (1980). Defendant's attractiveness as a factor in the outcome of criminal trials: An observational study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 10, 348-361.
44. Stewart, J. E. (1984). Appearance and punishment: The attraction-leniency effect in the courtroom. The Journal of Social Psychology, 125, 373-378.
45. Strickland, B. (1989). Internal-external control expectancies: From contingency to creativity. American Psychologist, 44, 1-12.
46. Weiten, W. (1980). The attraction-leniency effect in jury research: An examination of external validity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 10, 340-347.
47. Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (1968).
48. Wuensch, K. L., Chia, R. C., Castellow, W. A., Chuang, C. J., & Cheng, B. S. (1993). Effects of physical attractiveness, sex, and type of crime on mock juror decisions: A replication with Chinese students. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 24, 414-427.
49. Zuckerman, M., & Gerbasi, K. C. (1977). Belief in internal control or belief in a just world: The use and misuse of the I-E scale in predictions of attitudes and behavior. Journal of Personality, 45, 356-378.