scholarly journals The Effect of Delayed Reporting on Mock-Juror Decision-Making in the Era of #MeToo

2021 ◽  
pp. 088626052199746
Author(s):  
Bailey M. Fraser ◽  
Emily Pica ◽  
Joanna D. Pozzulo
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Sexual Harassment ◽  
Mock Juror ◽  
Juror Decision Making ◽  
Sexual Offence ◽  
Mock Jurors ◽  
Mock Trial ◽  
Trial Transcript ◽  
Victim Perception

The #MeToo movement has given voice to victims of sexual harassment and assault. In many of these cases, there have been long delays in reporting of the sexual offence (e.g., the Harvey Weinstein case). The purpose of this study was to examine how the type of sexual offence (harassment vs. assault) and the length of delayed reporting (15, 25, 35 years) influenced mock-juror decision-making. Mock-jurors ( N = 319) read a mock trial transcript depicting an alleged sexual offence and were asked to render a dichotomous verdict, continuous guilt rating, and defendant and victim perception ratings. The data indicated an effect of sexual offence type such that mock-jurors held more favorable perceptions of the defendant when the alleged offence was harassment compared with assault. There also was an effect of delayed reporting such that mock-jurors rendered more guilty verdicts when there was a 25-year delay compared with a 15-year delay. Intriguingly, these results suggest that jurors in sexual offence cases may perceive longer delays in reporting as more believable than shorter delays.

What Makes Race Salient? Juror Decision-Making in Same-Race Versus Cross-Race Identification Scenarios and the Influence of Expert Testimony

2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (8) ◽  
pp. 1234-1251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evelyn M. Maeder ◽  
Logan Ewanation
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Juror Decision Making ◽  
Direct Influence ◽  
Mock Jurors ◽  
Race Effect ◽  
Trial Transcript ◽  
The Cross ◽  
Black Defendant ◽  
Race Identification

Research demonstrates that juror race may interact with defendant race to influence decision-making, but little work has investigated interactions with eyewitness race. This study tested whether Black/White jurors would produce different perceptions/decisions when faced with a Black/White defendant identified by a Black/White eyewitness. We also examined the influence of expert testimony regarding the cross-race effect in two floating cells. Mock jurors read a trial transcript, provided a verdict and trial party ratings, and indicated perceived race salience. Black jurors were more likely to convict a White defendant identified by a Black eyewitness than a Black defendant identified by a White eyewitness. Expert testimony was valued more highly when the defendant was Black, but had no direct influence on verdict; however, it raised race salience perceptions (as did presence of Black trial parties). Perceived race salience was associated with lower rates of conviction, suggesting that race and expert testimony have potential courtroom implications.

The Influence of Inconsistency in Eyewitness Reports, Eyewitness Age and Crime Type on Mock Juror Decision-Making

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bailey M. Fraser ◽  
Simona Mackovichova ◽  
Lauren E. Thompson ◽  
Joanna D. Pozzulo ◽  
Hunter R. Hanna ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Mock Juror ◽  
Juror Decision Making ◽  
Crime Type ◽  
Eyewitness Reports

The Effects of Victim Gender, Defendant Gender, and Defendant Age on Juror Decision Making

2009 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna D. Pozzulo ◽  
Julie Dempsey ◽  
Evelyn Maeder ◽  
Laura Allen
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Juror Decision Making ◽  
Mock Jurors ◽  
Female Defendant ◽  
Victim Gender

Mock jurors provided credibility ratings for a victim (12 years old) and defendant when victim gender, defendant gender, and defendant age (15 vs. 40 years old) were manipulated. Verdicts and sentence recommendations also were assessed. Higher guilt ratings were found for a male versus female defendant. Juror gender was examined as a covariate in the analyses. Female jurors rated the victim higher on accuracy, truthfulness, and believability than male jurors. Male jurors rated the defendant higher on reliability, credibility, truthfulness, and believability than female jurors. Male jurors perceived the victim to desire and cause the crime to a greater extent than female jurors. Mock jurors rated the victim as more responsible for the crime with an older versus younger defendant. Female jurors ascribed higher responsibility to the defendant compared to male jurors. The younger versus older defendant was perceived to have desired the event but only when the victim was female versus male.

A third verdict option: Exploring the impact of the not proven verdict on mock juror decision making.

2008 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 241-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorraine Hope ◽  
Edith Greene ◽  
Amina Memon ◽  
Melanie Gavisk ◽  
Kate Houston
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Mock Juror ◽  
Juror Decision Making ◽  
The Impact
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document