Female Mock Jurors and the Child Victim: An Assessment of Age and Sex as Factors in Trial Sentencing

Theresa Bardy

Amanda Dubs

Beverly Guilbault

Christine Manigat

Background• Child witnesses are often seen as more honest but less

accurate than older witnesses (Ross, Dunning, Toglia, & Ceci, 1990; Nightingale, 1993; McCauley & Parker, 2000).

• Child witness ratings are susceptible to Contrast Effects (Ross et al, 1990).

– Contrast effects occur when a stereotype is violated or shown to be completely false (e.g. A child giving a very “adult-like” testimony).

– This has been thought to effect studies using the same testimony and changing only the age of the witness

Background (cont’d)

• Research has found that mock jurors rated children as more credible than other age groups such as adolescents, young adults and the elderly (Ross et al., 1990).

• The effects of age on the rate of guilty verdicts has not been determined.

– Some studies have shown no significant effects of age (Ross et al., 1990) .

– Some studies have suggested that age has a significant effect (Nightingale, 1993) .

Background (cont’d)

• Sex of the defendant makes a difference in the jury’s verdict (Stephan, 1974) – A male defendant usually receives a more severe

sentence than a female defendant (Mazzella & Feingold, 1994)

– On the contrary, other researchers found that female defendants are given slightly harsher sentences than male defendants (Stephan, 1974)

Hypothesis

Most severe sentence - male defendant and child victim

Least severe sentence - female defendant and adult victim

The child victim will elicit a significantly more severe sentence than the adult.

Lastly, the male defendant will elicit a significantly more severe sentence than the female.

Rationale

Women, more than men, tend to perceive a child as more credible (McCauley & Parker, 2001)

A male defendant usually receives a more severe sentence than a female defendant (Mazzella & Feingold, 1994)

Method

• 2 (Age: child vs. adult) X 2 (Sex: male vs. female) Independent groups design

MethodParticipants:

117 Mount Holyoke College students, ranging in age from 18-65.

• 30 in child/male condition

• 30 in child/female condition

• 28 in adult/male condition

• 29 in adult/female condition

Randomly assigned

Materials:

Trial Case summary

One dependent measure question and two questions concerning the independent variables

Method (cont’d)Procedure:

Written consent from each participant

Packets were randomly distributed to the participants

Instructed not to turn back to previous pages

Read and completed the packet in approximately 10mins

Debriefed

Results• Dependent variable

– Severity of sentence (scale: 1 – 10 years in prison)

Prediction Most severe sentence - male defendant and child victim

Least severe sentence - female defendant and adult victim

The child victim always elicits a more severe sentence than the adult.

The male defendant always gets more severe sentence than the female.

Results (cont’d)~ Before conducting the study we specified that the

following data would be eliminated:~ Those with an incorrect age estimate (more than two

years)

~ Those with an incorrect sex identification

~ Those who did not answer the sentencing question

~ The data from 17 participants was eliminated from analysis due to the above specifications.

Results (cont’d)A two-way Analysis of Variance

Significant differences ?

No significant main effect for Age

Significant Main effect was found for Sex

No significant interaction effect between Sex and Age

AgeError Bars show 95.0% Cl of Mean

Bars show Means

child adult

age

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

sentence

n=49

5.53

n=51

4.61

SexError Bars show 95.0% Cl of Mean

Bars show Means

male female

sex

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

sentence

n=51

5.78

n=49

4.31

Age * Sex

child

adult

age

Error Bars show 95.0% Cl of Mean

Bars show Means

male female

sex

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

sentence

n=25

6.52

n=26

5.08

n=24

4.50

n=25

4.12

DiscussionSignificant differences ?

No significant differences in sentencing between a child victim and an adult victim

Males were given significantly more severe sentences than females

No significant interaction effect between Sex and Age

Our findings are both consistent and inconsistent with past researchConsistent with Ross et al. and Mazzella & Feingold Inconsistent with Nightingale and Stephan

Discussion (cont’d)

Implications based on our study:Stereotypes about Sex differences are likely to influence individuals, which could lead to biased decisions in trial

Stereotypes about Age differences are unlikely to influence individuals

Discussion (cont’d)Problems encountered

Some questions lacked clarity

Case still lacked believability

Participants were not focused completely on the task

Discussion (cont’d)

Suggestions for Future Research:Modify this experiment

Using a believable caseTesting participants in groups as well as individuallyUsing different types of crimesTesting guilt rates to verify that they co-vary with sentencing as predicted

Use archival data to find evidence of differences in sentencing based on sex and ageSurvey individuals about sex and age stereotypes