Note takers who review are less vulnerable to the influence of stereotypes than note takers who do not review

Abstract

The current research investigated whether the opportunity to review reduced note takers' vulnerability to the influence of stereotypes when making decisions. Participants were presented with a trial in which a man or a woman had been charged with a stereotypically masculine crime. Results revealed that note takers who did not review were more likely to find a man guilty than a woman, and attributed a higher degree of offender relevant traits to a man than to a woman. Non-note takers and note takers who reviewed did not engage in stereotype-based processing. It was concluded that the provision of dedicated review periods reduced the extent to which note takers were influenced by stereotypes during decision making. Future research may consider investigating whether the benefit of dedicated review periods remains when jurors are presented with longer trials and when they are required to engage in deliberation.