Examining a Strategy for Improving Candidate Perceptions of Test Fairness

Candidate perceptions of test fairness have significant consequences for organizations. However, little attention has been directed toward interventions that may promote favorable reactions, despite recognition that the identification of such management practices is important. The current study investigated a strategy designed to improve candidate reactions—field vetting of items. This strategy involves comprehensive test item review sessions with a variety of applied subject matter experts. The extent to which the field vetting process resulted in more favorable reactions among police officers vying for promotion was investigated using a naturally-occurring quasi-experimental design. Results showed support for the field vetting process to improve reactions to high-stakes tests.     

Rape law reform and the effect of victim characteristics on case processing

Rape law reforms enacted during the past 20 years were designed to shift the focus of a rape case from the victim to the offender. Reformers and criminal justice officials speculated that changes in the rules of evidence and enactment of rape shield laws would result in less suspicion of the claims of rape victims and would make it less likely that the character, reputation, and behavior of the victim would affect decision making about the case. In this paper we examine the impact of rape law reform on the factors affecting the outcome of sexual assault cases bound over for trial in Detroit. We find little support for our hypothesis that the effect of victim characteristics on case processing decisions declined in the postreform period. Most of the victim characteristics did not have the expected effects on the likelihood of case dismissal, charge reduction, conviction, or incarceration. We did, on the other hand, find that the proportion of cases involving evidence of risk-taking behavior on the part of the victim or questions about the victim's credibility increased in the postreform period.     

Gender bias in courtroom dynamics

Respondents to numerous surveys about courtroom interaction have identified gender bias as a serious problem in the courts. Consistently, women perceive more bias than do men. To explore the importance of gender, role (judge vs. attorney), experience with bias, and age in predicting perceptions of gender bias in the courtroom, we conducted secondary analyses of data from a survey of judges and attorneys in Illinois. Three dimensions of bias were identified:Presence of Bias, Optimism (belief that bias is decreasing), andInstrumental Bias (use of biased behavior as a trial tactic). Although role, age, and experience had some importance in explaining the scores on these three factors, gender offered the greatest predictive power. Implications for future research and for ending bias in courtroom interaction are discussed.This research was completed with support from the Office of Social Science Research, University of Illinois at Chicago.