The Effects of Physical Attractiveness, Race, Socioeconomic Status, and Gender of Defendants and Victims on Judgments of Mock Jurors: A Meta‐Analysis<sup>1</sup>

Mazzella, Ronald; Feingold, Alan

doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb01552.x

Cited by 403 publications

(303 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

269

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Further, these effects have not only been found to operate within jurors but also within judges (Downs & Lyons 1991;Zebrowistz & McDonald, 1991). Mazzella and Feingold's (1994) meta-analysis concluded that, on average, it is advantageous for defendants to be physically attractive.…”

Section: The Attraction Leniency Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

When emotionality trumps reason: A study of individual processing style and juror bias

Gunnell

Ceci

2010

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

''Cognitive Experiential Self Theory'' (CEST) postulates that information-processing proceeds through two pathways, a rational one and an experiential one. The former is characterized by an emphasis on analysis, fact, and logical argument, whereas the latter is characterized by emotional and personal experience. We examined whether individuals influenced by the experiential system (E-processors) are more susceptible to extralegal biases (e.g. defendant attractiveness) than those influenced by the rational system (R-processors). Participants reviewed a criminal trial transcript and defendant profile and determined verdict, sentencing, and extralegal susceptibility. Although Eprocessors and R-processors convicted attractive defendants at similar rates, Eprocessors were more likely to convict less attractive defendants. Whereas R-processors did not sentence attractive and less attractive defendants differently, E-processors gave more lenient sentences to attractive defendants and harsher sentences to less attractive defendants. E-processors were also more likely to report that extralegal factors would change their verdicts. Further, the degree to which emotionality trumped rationality within an individual, as measured by a novel scoring method, linearly correlated with harsher sentences and extralegal influence. In sum, the results support an ''unattractive harshness'' effect during guilt determination, an attraction leniency effect during sentencing and increased susceptibility to extralegal factors within E-processors.

show abstract

Section: The Attraction Leniency Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

When emotionality trumps reason: A study of individual processing style and juror bias

Gunnell

Ceci

2010

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Extant research has established that jurors are often influenced by not only the facts in a case, but extralegal factors (e.g., attractiveness, gender) that have no bearing on the case itself (e.g., Mazzella & Feingold, 1994;Peace & Forrester, 2012). One such factor under investigation in the present study is the emotionality of a claim and whether this influences witness credibility.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Trials and Tribulations: Psychopathic Traits, Emotion, and Decision-Making in an Ambiguous Case of Sexual Assault

Peace¹,

Valois²

2014

PSYCH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Judgments of criminal culpability often are influenced by factors unrelated to case content, such as the emotionality of the victim and the personality of the judge. In the current study, we investigated the relationship between psychopathic traits (high/low) and information processing modes (experiential vs. rational) in a group of mock jurors (N = 383) asked to judge a "he said, she said" ambiguous case of sexual assault that varied according to both victim and defendant emotionality (high/low). The results demonstrated that victim and defendant emotionality was critical in determining case outcomes, which interacted with the processing style that participants utilized more. Specifically, experiential processors were more punitive towards the defendant when the defendant displayed low levels of emotion relative to high emotionality, whereas rational processors were slightly more punitive when high levels of emotion were being displayed. Psychopathic traits had no influence on ratings of veracity/credibility of the victim and defendant, or on overall guilt determinations and severity of sentencing. However, participants high in psychopathic traits believed that the alleged victim was making a false allegation more often when she was less emotional, and they were less punitive towards the false allegation than individuals low in psychopathic traits. These findings have important implications concerning how cases of sexual assault are interpreted in court, and extra-legal factors that may alter case outcomes.

show abstract

“…Some researchers have concluded that racial effects can be erased by judicial instruction (Pfeifer & Ogloff, 1991), by deliberation (Bernard, 1979), or by the absence of inadmissible evidence (Johnson, Whitestone, Jackson, & Gatto, 1995). Still other studies and meta-analyses find no evidence of racial bias (Mazzella & Feingold, 1994;McGuire & Bermant, 1977).…”

Section: Jurydecisionmakingisacomplexsetofpsychologicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Race in the Courtroom: Perceptions of Guilt and Dispositional Attributions

Sommers

Ellsworth

2000

Pers Soc Psychol Bull

223

255

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present studies compare the judgments of White and Black mock jurors in interracial trials. In Study 1, the defendant’s race did not influence White college students’ decisions but Black students demonstrated ingroup/outgroup bias in their guilt ratings and attributions for the defendant’s behavior. The aversive nature of modern racism suggests that Whites are motivated to appear nonprejudiced when racial issues are salient; therefore, the race salience of a trial summary was manipulated and given to noncollege students in Study 2. Once again, the defendant’s race did not influence Whites when racial issues were salient. But in the non-race-salient version of the same interracial case, White mock jurors rated the Black defendant more guilty, aggressive, and violent than the White defendant. Black mock jurors demonstrated same-race leniency in both versions of the trial, suggesting that racial issues are generally salient in the minds of Black jurors in interracial cases with Black defendants.

show abstract

The Effects of Physical Attractiveness, Race, Socioeconomic Status, and Gender of Defendants and Victims on Judgments of Mock Jurors: A Meta‐Analysis¹

Cited by 403 publications

References 29 publications

When emotionality trumps reason: A study of individual processing style and juror bias

When emotionality trumps reason: A study of individual processing style and juror bias

Trials and Tribulations: Psychopathic Traits, Emotion, and Decision-Making in an Ambiguous Case of Sexual Assault

Race in the Courtroom: Perceptions of Guilt and Dispositional Attributions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The Effects of Physical Attractiveness, Race, Socioeconomic Status, and Gender of Defendants and Victims on Judgments of Mock Jurors: A Meta‐Analysis1

Cited by 403 publications

References 29 publications

When emotionality trumps reason: A study of individual processing style and juror bias

When emotionality trumps reason: A study of individual processing style and juror bias

Trials and Tribulations: Psychopathic Traits, Emotion, and Decision-Making in an Ambiguous Case of Sexual Assault

Race in the Courtroom: Perceptions of Guilt and Dispositional Attributions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The Effects of Physical Attractiveness, Race, Socioeconomic Status, and Gender of Defendants and Victims on Judgments of Mock Jurors: A Meta‐Analysis¹