Dixon et al (2002) Flashcards
Clifasefi et al (2007)
There’s a weak relationship between the accuracy of witnesses’ accounts and confidence — just because a witness is confident in their testimony, it doesn’t mean they are accurate
Penrod and Cutler (1995)
> Aim:- Tested the effect of confidence using a videotaped mock trial of a robbery.
Method:- Participants were allocated randomly to either an 80% or 100% confidence condition
Result:- 100% confidence: 67% jury voted that the robber was guilty
Result:- 80% confidence: 60% jury voted that the robber was guilty
Concluded:- The more confident the witness is in providing evidence, the more likely the jury is to return a guilty verdict
Rozell (1985)
- Found that children are good observers but they have problems translating their observations verbally.
- Children are reliable witnesses in child abuse cases but they have difficulty in recalling the events chronologically and can fall victim to leading questions.
- RESPONSE: Children are often allowed to “free report” (give their own narrative versions of events)
[The halo effect]
The Halo Effect: A cognitive bias where an observer’s overall impression of a person influences their feelings and thoughts about the person’s character
Dion et al (1972)
-Used 60 psychology students they found that attractive people are more likely to be viewed as having socially desirable personalities and are less likely to be convinced of a crime
Castellow et al (1990)
> Aim:- Investigated whether an attractive defendant is less likely to be seen as guilty than an unattractive defendant
Aim:- Investigated whether a defendant is more likely to be found guilty when the victim is attractive
Method:- Used 145 psychology students in a mock trial and told them they would be reading a sexual harassment case, would have to answer questions on it
Method:- Photos of the defendant and victim were provided and rated on a scale of 1 (unattractive) to 9 (attractive)
Results:- Attractive defendant v.s. Unattractive defendant: 56% v.s. 76%
Results:- Attractive victim v.s. Unattractive victim: 77% v.s. 55%
Concluded:- Appearance can have a powerful effect on jurors
Sigall and Ostrove (1975)
> Aim:- Investigated whether the attractiveness of the defendant affects the jury’s verdict
Aim:- Whether there was a relationship between attractiveness and type of crime committed
Method:- Used 120 undergraduates, split into 6 groups of 10 men and 10 women. Each participant had to sentence the defendant to a term of imprisonment
1st IV:- Whether the female defendant was attractive/unattractive/no photo (control)
2nd IV:- Whether the crime was a burglary or a fraud
Results:- Participants in the unattractive and control group gave similar sentences in both crimes.
Results:- The attractive group gave longer sentences for fraud and shorter sentences for burglary. The unattractive defendant had the opposite
Conclusion:- Good-looking people are more likely to get away with crime or receive reduced sentences unless their attractiveness helps them commit their crime, then they receive longer sentences
Maeder et al (2015)
During sexual assault trials, when the defendant was white attractive victims were rated as responsible for the alleged assault than unattractive victims. But when the defendant was black, this effect was reversed and non-existent when the defendant was aboriginal Canadian
Seggie (1983)
- Investigated the attribution of guilt as a function of accent and type of crime
- Used a repeated measures design, required 3 groups of participants to rate 3 accents on their probability of having committed a particular crime
- Accents: Received Pronunciation (RP), broad Australian, Asian
- Crimes: Embezzlement, damage to property, violence against a person
- Results: There is a significant difference between RP and the Australian accent
- RP accent: Embezzlement
- Australian accent: Violence
