Criminal Topic 4- Psychology And The Courtroom (cog)

Question 1

What is topic 4

Answer 1

Psychology and the courtroom (cog)

Question 2

What is the research in topic 4

Answer 2

Key: Dixon, supporting: Pernod and cutler, sigall and ostrove, pennington and hastie, simons and Chabris

Question 3

Outline the key research by Dixon- the role of accent and the context in perception of guilt

Answer 3

Aims: to test the hyp that a brummie accented suspect would receive a higher rating of guilt than a suspect w a standard accent. Aimed to see whether race and the type of crime would make a diff to likelihood of being rated guilty. Sample: 119 white undergrad students (24m, 95f, mean age 25.2) from psych department at uni college Worcester as part of course requirement (ps who grows up in Birmingham excluded). Method: independent measures, ps listened to 2 min recorded convo based on transcript of interview from Birmingham police station ‘95. Standard accent male student in 40s was police inspector, suspect was male in 20s and as a natural code switcher was able to speak in a brummie and standard accent. 3ivs: suspect spoke either brummie or standard accent, accused of either armed robbery (blue collar crime) or cheque fraud (white collar crime) and pleading innocent. Suspect described by inspector as either black or white. After listening, ps rated suspect on 7 point scale from innocent to guilty. Results: sig effect of accent on attribution of guilt, brummie rated higher on guilt. Brummie, black and blue collar crime received sig higher guilt ratings than other 5 conditions. Conc: some accents deemed guiltier than others, suggests it’s Likely the strength of evidence in real cases will moderate any effects of accent

Question 4

Penrod and cutler- witness confidence

Answer 4

Studied witness confidence when confidence of key female eyewitness manipulated. Videotaped mock trial for robbery, key fem eyewitness stated either 80 or 100% confidence about her id of the suspect. Ps (mock jurors) were undergrads and experienced jurors. Dev: % of guilty verdicts given in each condition. Results: sig diff shown: 60% guilty verdicts in 80% condition, 67% in 100% condition. 33%not guilty so confidence only one factor. When jurors educated to assess good and bad witnesses identifying conditions by expert psych witness, confidence had less influence

Question 5

Sigall and ostrove- attractiveness of the defendant

Answer 5

Lab experiment- 120 college students(60m,60f) reads account of a crime where defendant was female. Iv: if crime was burglary or Swindling (fraud) and whether ps read that female was described as attractive/unattractive/no info about attractiveness (control). M and f ps randomly assigned 10 in each and 5 in each crime. Ps asked to recommend punishment years in prison from 1-15 years swindling&attractive -5.45 years but burglary&attractive-2.8 years on average, unattractive more even (swin-4.35/burg-5.2) control was 4.34 swin/5.1 burg. Crime where beauty not relevant treated more leniently but if used beauty to advantage-treated more harshly.

Question 6

Pennington and hastie- story order

Answer 6

Aim: to test the idea that jurors are more easily persuaded by chronological story order presented evidence rather than witness order (presenting witnesses in order most likely to persuade a jury.- based on primacy and recent effect). Ps asked to be jurors in mock murder trial, defence and prosecution varied the order of evidence presented. Results: condition A(defence story and prosecution story)- 59%guilty verdicts, B(defence witness, prosecution witness)-63%. C(defence story, prosecution witness)-31%. D(defence witness,pros story)-78%. Story order more persuasive than witness as easier for jurors to construct a story from events in order

Question 7

Simons and chabris-visual inattention

Answer 7

People fail to see unexpected event 46% of the time e en when it crossed their field of vision. Barristers cs. Use this to discredit eyewitness testimony as if shown cctv-could have missed details. But still seen 54% of the time and a number of factors made it more likely to be seen e.g. when opaque, similar to task, easy take and when less unusual

Question 8

Strategy to influence jury decision making

Answer 8

Tell witness to appear confident, hide appearance of suspect for swindling crimes, have suspect speak in a standard accent