The impact of protective shields and videotape testimony on conviction rates in a simulated trial of child sexual abuse

In Experiment 1 mock jurors watched a videotape simulation of a sexual abuse trial that included a 10-year-old child witness testifying in one of three different modalities: (1) The child testified in court while directly confronting the defendant (open court condition). (2) The child testified in court with a protective shield placed between the child and the defendant (shield condition). (3) The child testified outside the courtroom and the child's testimony was presented to the jury and the defendant on a video monitor (video condition). The mock jurors judged the guilt of the defendant after watching the entire trial. The modality of the child's testimony had no impact on conviction rates. In Experiment 2 subjects watched the same trial that was used in Experiment 1. The trial was stopped immediately after the child testified (the child was the first witness to take the stand), and subjects judged the guilt of the defendant. The modality of the child's testimony had a significant impact on conviction rates. Subjects in the open court condition were more likely to convict the defendant than subjects in the shield and videotape conditions. These findings are relevant to Supreme Court decisions regarding the use of protective devices with child witnesses.     

Face-to-Face Confrontation: Effects of Closed-Circuit Technology on Children's Eyewitness Testimony and Jurors' Decisions

The present study was designed to examine effects of closed-circuit technology on children's testimony and jurors' perceptions of child witnesses. For the study, a series of elaborately staged mock trials was held. First, 5- to 6-year-old and 8- to 9-year-old children individually participated in a play session with an unfamiliar male confederate. Approximately 2 weeks later, children individually testified about the event at a downtown city courtroom. Mock juries composed of community recruits viewed the trials, with the child's testimony presented either live in open court or over closed-circuit television. Mock jurors made ratings concerning the child witness and the defendant, and deliberated to reach a verdict. Results indicated that overall, older children were more accurate witnesses than younger children. However, older, not younger children produced more inaccurate information in free recall. Compared to live testimony in open court, use of closed-circuit technology led to decreased suggestibility for younger children. Testifying in open court was also associated with children experiencing greater pretrial anxiety. Closed-circuit technology did not diminish factfinders' abilities to discriminate accurate from inaccurate child testimony, nor did it directly bias jurors against the defendant. However, closed-circuit testimony biased jurors against child witnesses. Moreover, jurors tended to base their impressions of witness credibility on perceived confidence and consistency. Implications for the use of closed- circuit technology when children testify are discussed.     

The Believability of Hearsay Testimony in a Child Sexual Assault Trial

Two experiments investigated how mock jurors react to hearsay testimony in a case involving child sexual assault. Participants read a fictional criminal trial summary involving the sexual assault of a 4-(Experiment 2 only), 6-, or 14-year-old female. The summaries were presented in one of four conditions: (a) child condition—the alleged victim testified; (b) hearsay condition—the alleged victim did not testify, but an adult hearsay witness did testify; (c) multiple condition (Experiment 1 only)—both the alleged victim and the adult hearsay witness testified; and (d) no-witness condition—neither the alleged victim nor the hearsay witness testified. The hearsay testimony was believed to a considerable degree, and this testimony led to an increase in the perceived guilt of the defendant. Moreover, these results were comparable to those of conditions in which the alleged victim testified. The results are discussed in terms of the psychosocial factors affecting the perception of hearsay testimony in a child sexual assault trial.     

The effect of a judicial declaration of competence on the perceived credibility of children and defendants

Purpose. Three studies were conducted to determine the effect of a judicial declaration of competence on perceptions of credibility towards a child witness and an adult defendant. Methods. Undergraduates read vignettes about a 5‐ or a 13‐year‐old child witness or an adult involved in either a sexual assault case or a motor vehicle accident case. In the child conditions, the case was either preceded by a declaration of the child's competence to testify (either specific or general declaration) or there was no mention of the competence of the child. Participants then rated the perceived credibility of both the complainant/witness and the defendant. Results. A judicial declaration of competence that was targeted at the particular child sometimes increased the credibility ratings of the child and decreased those of the defendant, sometimes to levels beyond those observed in the adult conditions. These effects on credibility were not replicated when a general declaration of all children's competence was used. In fact, the general declaration sometimes resulted in more positive ratings of the defendant. Conclusions. These results are discussed in the context of recommendations for the use of competence evaluations and declarations of competence in court.     

Dialect on trial: use of African American Vernacular English influences juror appraisals*

ABSTRACT

We investigated the effect of dialect and race on juror decision making. Mock jurors read a summary of an ambiguous criminal case, which included audio of a defense witness (Study 1) or defendant (Study 2). Both speaker dialect [General American English (GAE)/African American Vernacular English (AAVE)] and race (White/Black) were crossed; Study 2 also included three levels of case (Ambiguous/Pro-Prosecution/Pro-Defense) to evaluate any effects of evidentiary context. In both studies, jurors who listened to the AAVE recording found the AAVE-speaking witness to be less professional and less educated than their GAE-speaking counterparts. Interestingly, jurors in Study 2 who heard the defendant use GAE were more likely to find him guilty and found him less credible when the case favored the prosecution, hinting that ingroup biases such as the black sheep effect may also play a role in perceptions of dialect. Secondary analyses found that AAVE predicted more negative overall evaluations of the speaker, and these negative evaluations were associated with an increase in guilty verdicts. Together, these findings suggest that dialect plays an under-investigated role in the courtroom, and that bias against AAVE negatively impacts juror appraisals of its speakers and can potentially influence juror decision making.     

从“审被告”到“审证人”?--诉讼制度改革背景下刑事庭审模式转型刍议

以“审被告”为主要特色的我国传统刑事庭审模式已经不能适应时代要求,为此应当构建一种以“审证人”为主要内容和表征的刑事庭审模式。我国新颁布的刑事诉讼法在要求和强制证人出庭方面的进步,体现了“审被告”模式向“审证人”模式转变的思路。而当下我国正在推行的变“以侦查为中心”为“以审判为中心”的诉讼制度改革,为庭审模式的转变提供了新的动力和契机。今后的刑事庭审模式改革,应在坚持已有进展的基础上,继续强化证人出庭力度,完善严格证明规则,同时赋予被告人沉默权,逐渐淡化“审被告”模式色彩,实现“审被告”模式向“审证人”模式的彻底转变。     

Disclosure of child sexual abuse: expressed emotions and credibility judgments of a child mock victim

Both lay persons and professionals believe that the emotions displayed by a child witness during disclosure of sexual abuse are a factor of importance when judging the child's credibility. Unfortunately, not all children display emotions according to expectations, leading to misjudgments, and possible miscarriage of justice. In the present study, we examined how lay people's credibility judgments were influenced by a child's displayed emotions during the disclosure of sexual abuse. Participants (n?=?119), viewed video recordings of a mock police interview of an 11-year-old child actor disclosing sexual abuse, displaying one of four emotional expressions (angry, sad, neutral, and positive). Results showed that participants were strongly influenced by the emotions displayed; in particular, the display of strong negative emotions (anger) or positive emotions during disclosure significantly reduced judged credibility. The credibility ratings predicted the participant? judgments of the defendant's guilt and the willingness to pass a guilty vote in a hypothetical trial.     

Mock jurors' perceptions of identifications made by intoxicated eyewitnesses

Abstract

Psychology research has generally neglected intoxicated eyewitnesses. The current study addressed this need by exploring mock jurors' perceptions of intoxicated witnesses. Undergraduate participants read summarized sexual or aggravated battery cases in which either the victim or a bystander identified the defendant under varying intoxication levels. They answered questions about the case and provided verdicts. Participants were sensitive to the effect that intoxication may have on witnesses' cognitive ability, but not to varying degrees of intoxication. Neither the role of the eyewitness nor the type of crime committed had an effect on perceptions of witness impairment. Participants' perceptions of witness impairment informed identification credibility ratings, and credibility assessments affected verdicts. Impairment and credibility ratings fully mediated intoxication's effect on verdicts. Unlike much prior research, our results suggest that mock jurors can consider potentially important witness information when rendering verdicts.     

Mock Juror Gender Biases and Perceptions of Self-Defense Claims in Intimate Partner Homicide

Findings are reported from an experiment that examined mock jurors’ gender biases regarding intimate homicide case adjudications. Mock jurors were more likely to convict a man than a woman who had killed an abusive partner, which was partially mediated by sympathy toward both the victim and defendant. Analyses revealed an abuser height and abuser gender interaction such that conviction rates for women defendants were higher when her abuser was taller compared to when he was shorter than she; abuser height did not influence conviction rates for men. Findings also suggested that when given information about a child being present, mock jurors perceived the killing of the abusive partner as an act to protect that child. The results are discussed in relation to how extra-legal factors impact juror perceptions of domestic violence cases in the courtroom.     

Effects of an Alibi Witness’s Relationship to the Defendant on Mock Jurors’ Judgments

Two studies tested the impact of an alibi witness’s relationship to a defendant on the perceived credibility of that witness. In the first study, 291 mock jurors estimated the frequency with which individuals would invent alibis, the frequency they themselves would do so, and the frequency of interpersonal contact among individuals of varying relationships. The degree of relationship between an alibi witness and a defendant remained a predictor of witness credibility when contact frequency was controlled. In the second study, 512 mock jurors were randomly assigned to case scenarios. Skepticism toward witnesses who are biologically or affinally related to a defendant was greater than skepticism toward a socially linked witness. Both studies supported predications from kinship theory and reciprocal altruism.     

Using British Trial Procedures in American Cases: A More Civil Trial?

A number of attorneys, judges, and legal scholars have asserted that the overly combative nature of American trials may impact on the actual quality of justice and bring the legal system into disrepute. In contrast, many who witness criminal and civil trials conducted in Great Britain are struck by the greater apparent civility of the courtroom atmosphere. Closer examination of the English system reveals seven specific procedural differences that may contribute to this perceived change in atmosphere. In this study, these procedural differences were manipulated and their effect on verdict and on perceptions of trial participants measured. In addition, opinions about these differences were elicited. Results showed that while the trial was perceived as more civil, and the judge viewed more positively, participants tended to indicate preferences for the American style. Implications of these results are discussed.     

Validation of the Child Sexual Abuse Knowledge Questionnaire

A validation study of the Child Sexual Abuse Knowledge Questionnaire (CSA-KQ) was conducted on a sample of 1712 non-empanelled jurors in the greater Sydney area, Australia. The CSA-KQ contains nine items derived from empirical findings on common misconceptions about typical features of abuse offences, children’s responses to child sexual abuse, and their ability to give reliable evidence. Study 1 tested the factor structure of the questionnaire in a sample of 843 non-empanelled jurors. The best model indicated by exploratory factor analysis had two factors: the Impact of Sexual Abuse on Children and Contextual Influences on the Report. Study 2 cross-validated the findings and tested the predictive validity of the CSA-KQ in a realistic simulated trial in which an 11-year-old complainant alleged abuse by her grandfather. Confirmatory factor analysis replicated the findings of Study 1, showing strong reliability for each of the factors (ρ_y?=?0.70 to ρ_y?=?0.80) and for the CSA-KQ (ρ_y?=?0.76). CSA-KQ scores were significantly correlated with the perceived credibility of the complainant (r?=?0.23). Moreover, the CSA-KQ scores predicted verdict: jurors with greater knowledge about CSA were more likely to convict the defendant than jurors who knew less about CSA.     

Role call: sex,gender roles,and intimate partner violence

ABSTRACT

Intimate partner violence (IPV) continues to be viewed in gendered and heteronormative ways. Stanziani, Cox, and Coffey (2018, Adding insult to injury: Sex, sexual orientation, and juror decision-making in a case of intimate partner violence. Journal of Homosexuality, 65(10), 1325–1350) presented participants with a case of alleged IPV while manipulating the sex and sexual orientation of the aggressor/victim dyad. Results suggested participants view violence perpetrated by a man against a woman most abhorrently. The current study replicated and expanded that study, exploring how gender role beliefs influence participant decision-making. Female participants held more adverse attitudes towards IPV when a male assaulted a female. Further, participant gender role beliefs influenced decision-making. Specifically, males who endorsed higher levels of hegemonic masculinity perceived the crime to be less serious, while females who endorsed the same beliefs perceived the defendant as less likely to benefit from treatment. Overall, results suggest individual beliefs regarding gender roles and masculinity may influence their perceptions of IPV, regardless of the gender and sexual orientation of the aggressor and victim.     

I Spy with My Little Eye: Jurors’ Detection of Internal Validity Threats in Expert Evidence

This experiment examined whether jury-eligible community members (N = 223) were able to detect internally invalid psychological science presented at trial. Participants read a simulated child sexual abuse case in which the defense expert described a study he had conducted on witness memory and suggestibility. We varied the study’s internal validity (valid, missing control group, confound, and experimenter bias) and publication status (published, unpublished). Expert evidence quality ratings were higher for the valid versus missing control group version only. Publication increased ratings of defendant guilt when the study was missing a control group. Variations in internal validity did not influence perceptions of child victim credibility or police interview quality. Participants’ limited detection of internal validity threats underscores the need to examine the effectiveness of traditional legal safeguards against junk science in court and improve the scientific reasoning ability of lay people and legal professionals.     

对强制证人到庭例外规定的思考——评《刑事诉讼法》第188条第1款

2012年修改的《刑事诉讼法》第188条第一款规定＂经人民法院通知,证人没有正当理由不出庭作证的,人民法院可以强制其到庭,但是被告人的配偶、父母、子女除外。＂这一规定并未赋予特定亲属拒绝作证权。《刑事诉讼法》一方面要求被告人的上述亲属必须提供相关证言,同时又允许这些特定亲属拒绝出庭,实际上是以维护家庭关系之名,严重妨害了被告人的对质权,有必要以法治国家通行的亲属拒绝作证权取代强制证人到庭例外规定。     

Battered women who kill

This study assesses acquital rates using mock jurors in cases involving a battered woman charged with killing her husband. The simulated trial format was based on actual courtroom proceedings including witness cross-examination and jury deliberation proceedings. The type of plea entered was varied and reflected either self-defense, automatism, or a hypothetical plea of psychological self-defense. The severity of abuse incurred by the defendant was also varied along with expert testimony. Jurors more frequently found the defendant not guilty when a plea of automatism was entered compared to a plea of self-defense. The frequency of acquittals following a plea of psychological self-defense resulted in more acquittals than the self-defense plea but significantly fewer than the automatism plea. The likelihood of acquittal increased under conditions of severe abuse as opposed to moderate abuse. Expert witness testimony was observed to influence verdicts during juror deliberations.     

Empathy and Jurors' Decisions in Patricide Trials Involving Child Sexual Assault Allegations

In a mock-trial paradigm, 205 participants considered a patricide trial in which a child defendant claimed the patricide was done in self-defense after years of sexual abuse. Participants in an empathy-induction condition were asked to take the perspective of the defendant and to detail how they would be thinking and feeling if they were the defendant. Control condition participants received no such instructions. Results indicated that, compared to jurors in the control condition, jurors who were asked to take the defendant's perspective had more empathy for the defendant (without feeling more similar to or more sympathy for the defendant), found the defendant less guilty and less responsible for the murder, and were more likely to consider abuse to be a mitigating factor in the killing. Overall, compared to men, women were more likely to believe the defendant's abuse allegations, find the defendant credible, and consider the defendant to be less responsible for the murder. Women in the empathy condition found the defendant less guilty than did all other jurors. Finally, child defendant gender was also varied, but this had few effects on case judgments overall. Jurors, however, were more likely to believe that the girl defendant was sexually abused than the boy defendant. We discuss theoretical implications for understanding the social psychological construct of empathy as well as implications for understanding jurors' decisions in cases involving child sexual assault allegations.     

Hearsay Versus Children's Testimony: Effects of Truthful and Deceptive Statements on Jurors’ Decisions

Researchers and courts are focusing increasing attention on the reliability of children's out-of-court statements, especially in relation to trials of child sexual abuse. The main goal of this study was to investigate the effects of presentation of children's out-of-court statements (e.g., hearsay) on jurors' perceptions of witness credibility and defendant guilt, and on jurors' abilities to reach the truth. Child participants experienced either a mock crime or were coached to say they experienced the crime when in fact they had not. During elaborate mock trials involving community member jurors, children's testimony was presented either: (1) live, (2) on videotape, or (3) via a social worker. Analyses revealed that testimony format directly influenced jurors' perceptions of child and social worker credibility (e.g., children were perceived as less likely to provide false statements if they testified live) as well as jurors' sympathy toward the child, all of which then predicted jurors' confidence in defendant guilt. Jurors had difficulty discerning accurate from deceptive child statements regardless of testimony format. Implications for psychology and the legal system are discussed.