4. Psychology and the courtroom (cognitive)

Question 1

DEFENDANTS BACKGROUND RESEARCH - Stewart - Aim/Hypothesis

Answer 1

investigated the impact of appearance on jury decisions. The hypothesis for this study was that there would be a negative correlation between the attractiveness of the defendant and the severity of the punishment. In other words, the prediction is that as the attractiveness of the defendant increases, the severity of the punishment decreases.

Question 2

Stewart - Sample

Answer 2

Stewart observed 60 real life trials in Pennsylvania, USA;
Male 56
Female 4
Black 27
Hispanic 3
White 30

Question 3

Stewart - Procedure (one thing)

Answer 3

Observers rated the defendants on a range of scales; physical attractiveness, neatness, cleanliness and quality of dress. – these four items were combined to produce a score for attractiveness.

Question 4

Stewart - Results

Answer 4

• The four-item Attractiveness Index correlated significantly and negatively with severity of punishment.
• No significant correlation was found between race and attractiveness index.
• The inter-rater reliability for observer ratings was high (0.78).
• The correlation remained significant when seriousness of the crime was controlled.
• Some racial disparities in severity of punishment were noted: Non-whites, as compared to whites, were more conviction prone, more likely to be charged with violent crimes, and, once convicted, more likely to receive a sentence

Question 5

Conclusion

Answer 5

Stewart found that the more attractive an offender is, the less likely they are to be given such a severe punishment.

Question 6

Witnesses: Garcia and Griffit (1978)

What was it and what was the hypothesis?

What were the results?

Answer 6

Sometimes psychologists or other specialists maybe used as expert witnesses in a case. When witnesses are perceived as likeable, they are seen as more credible, whether working for the defence or the prosecution. Garcia and Griffit (1978) varied the likeability of the witnesses in a mock crime about a car accident .

Question 7

Evaluation of background theory - Strengths: (3)

Answer 7

Useful:
The mock trial method can be highly standardised and easily replicated in order to test different hypotheses and conditions with the same evidence and trial proceedings, so the research by Castellow can be easily replicated in a real trial by advising jurors that this may be a factor in their decision making and to there be aware of it

Socially sensitive:
The findings from mock trials can help to improve the judicial system by highlighting factors that influence jurors. If jurors and lawyers are better educated by the factors, they can both work together to ensure these factors are avoided in order to deliver a fair trial

Support for the individual debate:
The research by Sigall shows that attractiveness plays a key part in jury verdicts – this is based on how individuals view the attractiveness, this in turn impacted on the individual’s decision of fraud or burglary

Question 8

Evaluation of background theory - Weaknesses: (2)

Answer 8

Sampling Bias:
Mock trials tend to be made up of university students e.g. research by Castellow. This is not reflective of a real jury which is likely to have a mixture of ages, ethnic groups etc.
In a mock trial the jurors are aware that there are no extreme consequences for their decision in the sexual assault. Whereas in a real jury they have the added emotional experience and seriousness of the situation, therefore lacks ecological validity

Socially sensitive:
The research by Castellow highlights the inequalities in sexual assault cases – this may prevent attractive victims from coming forward
The same is for race – Maeder highlights racial inequalities in the judicial system