Dixon et al (Topic 4 crim psych in the courtroom) Flashcards
Background
Seggie 1983 found factors influence one another (race, accents, crime type) broad aussie accent judged as more guilty when suspect accused of blue-collar crime (assault).
More guilt was given to RP (received pronunciation) when suspect accused of white-collar crime (theft).
Brummie accent generally evaluated more negatively than either rural or regional or RP accents in many research.
Giles 1970 and Pfeifer and Ogloff 1991 found white students rated black defendants more guilty compared to white, especially if victim was white.
Main aim
To examine the influence of an English regional accent: whether Brummie accent which is associated with being working class would elicit stronger attributions of guilt than a standard accent.
other aim
Also investigated effects of two contextual variables on attribution of guilt: suspect race and type of crime committed (blue/white collar)
Method
Lab experiment to investigate whether accent, race of suspect and crim type (IV’s) led to attributions of guilt (DV).
Independent measures design
Took place in Department of Psychology at University-college Worcester.
Sample
119 white psych students
24 male
95 female
mean age of 25.2 years
Took part as a requirement of their degree.
(ethnocentric and all students)
Control for extraneous
Ps who grew up in Birmingham were excluded from sample as Birmingham accent was being investigated.
Procedure
Ps listened to 2 min recorded conversation between two actors, playing a middle aged police inspector and young male suspect pleading his innocence.
Based on transcript of real interview occurred in British police station in 1995.
Ps were randomly allocated to 1 out of 2 conditions: suspect (same actor) spoke in either standard RP or Brummie accent (code - switcher).
After listening, ps rated suspect’s guilt on 7-point scale ranging from innocent to guilty, they also rated the suspect on a language attitudes instrument.
Testing validity of accents
Validity of “code-switched” accents was tested prior, more than 95% were able to identify region of brummie accent.
To confirm accents were matched
Judges rated accents to be similar level of loudness, but brummie had higher speech rate, this is a feature of regional accent and therefore was not changed.
Crime type
This was also manipulated (IV) suspect was either accused of armed robbery (blue-collar) or cheque fraud (white-collar).
Race
Another IV. Manipulated by inspector making reference to appearance of person who committed crime, changed in different conditions.
Results- brummie accent
Statistical analysis showed brummie suspect was rated LOWER in superiority than RP suspect.
Brummie suspect was also rated guiltier (mean 4.27 on point-scale)
than standard RP (mean 3.65)
Results- brummie & black & blue collar suspect
Had significantly higher guilt ratings than all of other conditions.
Results- superiority and attractiveness
Statistically significant predictors of guilt.
Dynamism was not predictor. (the quality of being characterized by vigorous activity and progress.)
Together, superiority and attractiveness factors accounted for 13% of the variance in ps guilt ratings.
Conclusions
Attributions of guilt may be affected by accent.
Non-standard (English) speakers are perceived as guiltier than standard speakers; those with brummie accents (associated with lower class) are more likely to be perceived as guilty of an offence compared to the standard accent suspects.
Blue-collar crime suspects who are black with a brummie accent are more likely to be perceived as guilty while a suspect’s perceived superiority & attractiveness may also be a predictor of guilt.
Usefulness
Is considered useful.
If lawyers are aware of characteristics that influence jury decisions, can inform defendants and witnesses to enable them to present selves in best way.
For accents, defendants advised to speak clearly and avoid strong colloquialisms to try reduce effect of their accent.
Techniques could be developed to present their testimony in way that their speech is not directly heard by jury, accents then cannot influence decision making process.
Internal validity
High.
Lab experiment, many controls employed.
Ps listened to same 2 min interview transcript (except for difference in conditions) Dixon eliminated ps from Birmingham that may have biased answers.
Ensured accent isolated as an IV, effects can be studied.
Ecological validity
Problem: used mock jury of students who listened to transcript of real interview, listening to account of crime of armed robbery/fraud for 2 mins and deciding suspect guilt/innocence is not reflective of how juries make decisions in real-life court cases. Lacks mundane realism, even though allowed ps to deliberate in groups like a real jury, they were all students-not valid.
Research by Stewart 1980; analysed sentences given in real life court cases over 2 year period- increases validity of research in this area.
Individual & situational factors
Research in this area supports individual explanation.
Characteristics of defendants; age, race, accent influence if considered guilty or not, individual characteristics of witnesses such as confidence, influences how their testimony is perceived.
Situational factors also play role, most notably the type of crime. Research by Sigall and Ostrove; individual factor of suspect attractiveness and sentence they received was dependent on situational factor of whether crime was related to their attractiveness or not.
Dixon et al found black suspects with brummie accent were most likely perceived as guilty if they committed blue-collar crime (situational factor)
Socially sensitive
Can be considered socially sensitive, primarily investigating influence of brummie accent when compared with standard RP accent, should be considered how ps from Birmingham may feel upon reading results of this study.
May be distressed by findings that their accent is considered inferior and that in a court case their accent could negatively influence verdict reached, research therefore may create stereotyping problems.
