Paper 3 - Criminal 4 -accents in the courtroom Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

what is the halo effect

A

a cognitive bias in which an observer’s overall impression of a person influences their feelings and thoughts about the person’s character.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Describe the background study by Rozell on child witnesses

A

courts traditionally excluded child witnesses by reasoning that they do not have the capability to tell the truth about an event.
Rozell found the, to be good observers and more objective than adults. Children find it more difficult to recall the chronology of events and their recollection can be distorted by leading questions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Describe the background study done by Castellow on attractiveness of defendents/victims

A

They used a mock trial with 71 male and 74 female psychology students from east carolina university. Pps were tolf that they would be reading a sexual harassement case and would have to answer questions on it. Photographs were also provided, which had previously been rated on an attractive/ unattractive likert scale. Pps had to respond to a question of do you think Mr Radford is guilty of sexual harassemen.
When the defendent was attractive guilt vericts were found 56% of the time compared to 76% for an unattractive defendent.
When the victim was attractive the verdict was guilty 77% of the time compared to 55% with an unattractive victim.
They concluded that appearance can have a powerful affect on jurors and a defendent/victim might be adivsed to make the best of their appearance when in court.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Describe the background study by Penrod and Cutler on witness confidence

A

Mock trial
american Pps acted as jurors and were shown a videotaped trial of robbery in which eyewitness identification played a key role.
The pps were randomly allocated to a 80% or 100% confident condition
When the witness was 80% confident the guilty rate fell to 60%
When the witness was 100% confident, 67% said the suspect was guilty.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

what is the aim of Dixon’s research on accents and guilt

A

To test the hypothesis that a suspect with a brummie accent would recieve a higher rating of guilt than a suspect with a standrd accent.
Also to see if race and type of crime effects how the suspect was judged

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

what was the method of Dixon’s study

A

lab experiment
independent measures design
iv= brummie or standard accent, race, crime type (armed robbery or cheque fraud)
dv= attributions of guilt using a 7 point rating scale.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

what was the sample of Dixon’s study

A

pps were students from the psych departement at university college worcester. It was part of their course requirement to take part.
119 white undergraduates, 24 male, 95 female.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

what was the procedure of Dixon’s study

A
  1. pps listened to a 2 min tape recording of a mock interview. The interview was standardised exchange between a police officer and a suspect who had either a standard accent or a Brummie accent, both played by the same man who was pleading guilty
  2. one tape he was accused of white collar cheque fraud and another he was accused of blue collar armed robbery.
  3. the description of the suspect was either black or white
  4. pps rated the suspecs guilt on a 7 point rating scale ranging from innocent to guilty.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

what were the results of Dixon’s study for accent type

A

The suspect with the brummie accent was rated 4.27/7 and the suspect with the standard accent was rated 3.65/7.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what are the conclusions for Dixon’s study

A

the results suggest that decisions about guilt may be affected by accent.
Nonstandard english speakers tend to be perceived as more guilty than standard speakers though there is no cause and effect between having a brummie accent and being judges as guilty in court of law.
Dixon suggests that their results may provide a starting point for further work. for example it may be that non standard speakers are perceived as guiltier because their testimony is deemed less assured therefore more closely associated with shiftiness and being working class or similar criminal stereotypes.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

evaluate the validity of this topic

A
  1. Castellow - ecological validity of research using mock trials is low as it does not represent the real courtroom.However internal validity is high because a high level of control is possible.
  2. Dixon - high internal validity due to high control in a lab, but low ecological validity.
  3. Dixon - low population validity as he used psychology students so it cannot be generalised to other people, also, more females than males.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

evaluate the reliability of this topic

A
  1. Dixon used standardised procedures in a lab, repeatable, reliable
  2. Castellow - standardised photographs and and questions.
  3. penrod and cutler - standardised mock trials, videotaped trials, 80% or 100% confidence.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

evaluate the sampling bias of this topic

A

1.sample used by Dixon consists of psychology undergraduates and we might question the representativeness of this. people other than students may view accents differently.
2. castellow - Americans
3.rozell - used children

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

evaluate the ethnocentrism of this topic

A
  1. Dixon adopts a western perspective of accents and class that may be different to non western views.
  2. Castellow’s research is relying on western perceptions of attractiveness which may differ.
  3. penrod and cutler used american pps, different areas may have different views on confidence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

how does this topic relate to the freewill/ determinism debate

A
  1. Dixon -the decision jurors make is determined by social factors such as the accent of the defendant.
  2. Rozell - age is a biological factor - biological determinism
  3. Castellow - people who chose to not give the unattractive suspect a guilty verdict shows freewill
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

how does this topic relate to the individual/situational debate

A
  1. Dixon - situation of accent of people in the court room environment
  2. Rozell - individual - age is a biological stage
  3. Castellow - situation of person’s attractiveness
17
Q

evaluate the usefulness of research in this topic

A
  1. Dixon - it is useful for juries and judges to be aware that accent can impact jurors’ perceptions of guilt. this can lead to jurors being from the same area of the suspect
  2. Castellow - can be used to give advice to witnesses to be dressed smartly and look their best
  3. Rozell - shows us that children can be reliable witnesses in court, this can help many court cases that require children to give an eyewitness testimony
18
Q

evaluate ethical considerations in this topic

A
  1. in Dixon’s study pps were required to take part as part of their course, therefore some pps may have felt unable to withdraw from the study.
  2. Dixon - some pps may have felt distressed when listening to the taped interviews.
  3. Rozell - children no informed consent
19
Q

evaluate socially sensitive research in this topic

A
  1. Dixon - Brummie people may be discriminated against in a legal context,
  2. Castellow - unattractive people may be scared to go to court.
  3. Rozell - findings show that children are more suseptible to leading questions and confusion of chronology of events, lawyers may use this against children in the court room when testifying
20
Q

evaluate psychology as a sciene in this topic

A
  1. Dixon - lacks ecological validity
  2. Castellow - unrepresentitive sample, ethnocentric
  3. Dixon - high internal validity
21
Q

evaluate reductionism/holism this topic

A
  1. Dixon - holist, class, race and accent
  2. Castellow - reductionism, only looking at attractiveness
  3. Penrod and Cutler - only looking at confidence
22
Q

what are the 2 applications of topic 4

A

present evidence in order
using expert witnesses

23
Q

what is presenting evidence in order ?

A

Presenting evidence in a coherant chronological order.
the lawyer creates a timeline by organising the evidence into a story order so jurors can use this to enchance memory of the events of the crime.
jurors actively make sense of the information and attempt to make their own story based on their knowledge of the events.Jurors will hear different stories from several people, but will accept the story that covers the most amount of detail
at the end of the trial the judge sums up the evidence and advvices the jury on how to come to a verdict
Jurors will match the story they believe with a verdict decision.

24
Q

what is the usefulness of story order

A

presenting evidence in story order to create a timeline is useful for lawyers as it provides them with a strategy to influence decision making of jurors to benefit their client.

25
Q

What is the effectiveness of story order

A

it is a more persusasive strategy than witness order. However if both sides use a story order, any other advanatges that one side has may reduce this effect

26
Q

what are the practicalities of story order

A

counsel and their legal team need to make sure they collect and catagorise all evidence so it can be presented in the most effective story order to influence decision making of jurors

27
Q

what is using expert witness

A

expert testimony is used when there is a particular scientific, technical or specialised area that needs to be explained in court. This is provided by a qualified expert.
An expert witness should have a detailed knowledge of the subject matter, often lawyers will cross examine experts in a great detail and they should have powers of analytical reasoning and be able to think on their feet in case of fresh evidence or counter arguements
They should be able to communicate confidently and coherantly

28
Q

what is the usefulness of expert witnesses

A

experts must provide as much detail as is necessary to convince the judge that the expert’s opinion is accurate and reasoned. Thweir evidence shoukd be used to interpret evidence in court, it allows for speciaist information to be clearly explained so it can be understoof by the jurors to help them reach a verdict

29
Q

what is the effectiveness of expert witnesses

A

provides an effective safegaurd against jurors’ over-reliance on witness confidence in presenting their evidence. It also imptoves awareness of factos that influence eye witness testimonies. However, the court has the power to exclude evidence in certain circumstance diminshing the effectiveness of theit testimony.
A better solution may be that judges can specify what is appropruate to discuss in their testimony

30
Q

what are practicalities of expert witnesses

A

in large or complex cases the court may allow both the defense and prosecution to have an expert. however the cost should be proportionate to the value of the case
In less complex cases the court has the power to order that the parties appoint a single joint expert who is instructed by both parties involved in the dispute.