scholarly journals What You Say Matters: The Influence Of Alibi Content On Memory And Forensically Relevant Judgments

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Cowan
Keyword(s):  
Recall Performance ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Right Wing Authoritarianism ◽  
Physical Evidence ◽  
Legal Judgments ◽  
Influence Perceptions

Discussion of alibi believability has typically focused on the influence of the strength of the corroborating evidence. Little is known about the influence of the content of alibi narratives on legal judgments. The current studies explored the role of moral desirability of alibi activities on judgments about an alibi, the strength of the evidence against a suspect, and the probability of the suspect’s guilt as well as on recall performance. The role of Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and the alibi context were also evaluated. Alibi content did not affect judgments about alibis or evidence, but did influence perceptions of probability of suspect guilt. Morally undesirable and desirable alibis were both more memorable than neutral alibis. RWA was related to participants’ decisions regarding the alibi, the physical evidence, and the suspect’s likelihood of guilt. Finally, statements described as alibis were viewed with greater skepticism than statements described as narratives.

scholarly journals What You Say Matters: The Influence Of Alibi Content On Memory And Forensically Relevant Judgments

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Cowan
Keyword(s):  
Recall Performance ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Right Wing Authoritarianism ◽  
Physical Evidence ◽  
Legal Judgments ◽  
Influence Perceptions

Discussion of alibi believability has typically focused on the influence of the strength of the corroborating evidence. Little is known about the influence of the content of alibi narratives on legal judgments. The current studies explored the role of moral desirability of alibi activities on judgments about an alibi, the strength of the evidence against a suspect, and the probability of the suspect’s guilt as well as on recall performance. The role of Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and the alibi context were also evaluated. Alibi content did not affect judgments about alibis or evidence, but did influence perceptions of probability of suspect guilt. Morally undesirable and desirable alibis were both more memorable than neutral alibis. RWA was related to participants’ decisions regarding the alibi, the physical evidence, and the suspect’s likelihood of guilt. Finally, statements described as alibis were viewed with greater skepticism than statements described as narratives.

scholarly journals A closer look at intergroup threat within the dual process model framework: The mediating role of moral foundations

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Márton Hadarics ◽  
Anna Kende
Keyword(s):  
Process Model ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Model Framework ◽  
Intergroup Threat ◽  
Right Wing Authoritarianism ◽  
Mediating Role

In our study we investigated how right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) are related to perceived intergroup threat, and also tested the potential mediating role of individualizing and binding moral foundations within this relationship pattern. According to our results, both RWA and SDO enhanced the perceived threat related to immigration. Furthermore, the effect of SDO was partly mediated by individualizing moral foundations, while the effect of RWA was partly mediated by both kinds of moral foundations. It seems that perceived intergroup threat, at least to some extent, is influenced by personal moral preferences that can be derived from individual dispositions and motivations.

Compensating the Innocent: Perceptions of Exonerees’ Deservingness to Receive Financial Compensation for Wrongful Convictions

2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 710-732 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerry M. Karaffa ◽  
Jaimie Page ◽  
Julie M. Koch
Keyword(s):  
Public Attitudes ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Compensation Policy ◽  
Financial Compensation ◽  
Right Wing Authoritarianism ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Race Ethnicity

Those who have been wrongfully imprisoned face a variety of challenges upon reentering the community, and monetary compensation may be helpful in rebuilding one’s life following a period of incarceration. However, very little is known about factors that may impact public attitudes regarding compensation policy. Using a sample of 396 university students, we investigated the role of exonerees’ race/ethnicity and prior conviction history, as well as participants’ socially dominant and right-wing authoritarian attitudes in explaining beliefs about financial compensation. Results suggest that males, minority group members, and older participants tended to rate hypothetical exonerees as more deserving of financial compensation. Perceptions of deservingness for compensation did not differ according to the exonerees’ race/ethnicity, but exonerees who had no prior convictions were perceived as more deserving compared with those with prior misdemeanor or felony drug convictions. Participants’ right-wing authoritarianism scores were negatively associated with deservingness scores, whereas social dominance orientation scores were not significantly related to deservingness, after controlling for participant demographics and exoneree factors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document