Research has shown that attractive individuals are viewed more favorably than unattractive counterparts across different types of criminal trials, contributing to the belief that “what is beautiful is good” (Dion, Berscheid, & Walster, 1972). However, this research has not been replicated in cases involving sexually coercive tactics. In the present experiment, participants read a case file that included one of two (attractive or unattractive) digitally altered photographs of a defendant and one of two vignettes (physical or verbal coercion). They then completed a questionnaire about the case. The results indicated that more women than men found the defendant guilty, and jurors assigned significantly longer sentences to the defendant in the physical tactic condition than in the verbal tactic condition. In contrast to two of the hypotheses, the more attractive defendant was evaluated more harshly than the unattractive defendant and an interaction between attractiveness and tactic was not found. / Department of Psychological Science

The present study examined jurors' evaluations of retracted confessions as a function of the amount of trivial detail within the confession and level of interrogation pressure. Participants in the experimental conditions read a transcript of a murder trial involving a suspect who confessed in a high-pressure or low-pressure situation and provided either a high or low amount of detail. A no-confession control version, in which the suspect denied all allegations against him, was also included in the study. Although one analysis suggested that a high-amount of detail within the confession might make it more likely that jurors would give higher estimates of guilt, it did not lead jurors to give more guilty verdicts. In contrast to previous findings, the presence of a confession did not make it more likely that a juror would render a guilty verdict or give higher estimates of guilt, as no difference was found between the experimental groups and the control group. / Department of Psychological Science

The present study explored two main questions: Can jurors disregard pretrial publicity? And if jurors cannot disregard pretrial publicity, to what extent does it affect juror decision making? Participants (49 male and 71 female) listened to an audiotaped trial and were assigned to one of four conditions: They were either exposed to the critical evidence as PTP (PTP condition), as an admissible videotape (Video condition), as descriptive testimony given by a witness (Discussion condition), or they were not exposed to the critical evidence (Control condition). After hearing the audiotaped trial, participants were then asked to render a verdict in the case (guilty v. not guilty) on three different charges, rate their confidence in their verdicts, rate the probability of the defendant's guilt on each charge, make sentence recommendations, rate their confidence in their sentence recommendations, and report their attitudes about the defendant's character. Verdicts, sentence recommendations, and confidence judgments were not affected by pretrial publicity. However, results suggested that pretrial publicity may have an impact when judging the defendant's personality characteristics. / Department of Psychological Science

The present study investigated whether the presentation of severe psychological injury increased the perceived likelihood of sexual harassment and more plaintiff-friendly verdicts in a hostile environment sexual harassment claim. Four hundred thirty-two participants were presented with a case summary divided into five paragraphs. Within the fifth paragraph, participants were informed that the plaintiff suffered from different severity levels of psychological injury. Gender was monitored to ensure a proportional amount of males and females in each condition. Results indicated that the presentation of psychological injury in any form increased the likelihood of perceived sexual harassment and verdicts for the plaintiff. Participants believed that garden-variety injuries (i.e., embarrassment, humiliation) were more likely to occur from sexual harassment, and had a greater impact on their perceptions and liability determinations. These results suggest that participants may use the presentation of psychological injury as a heuristic that when present, favors the plaintiff. / Department of Psychological Science

This study examined the effects that a defendant's pleading of the fifth amendment during a criminal trial had on simulated juror's decisions regarding verdict, likelihood of guilt, certainty of guilt, sentence severity, and perceptions of the defendant's character. One hundred fifty-five undergraduate psychology students read one of three versions of a transcript, based on a trial of a man charged with theft, in which the defendant did not plead the fifth (control), plead the fifth, or plead the fifth possibly for reasons other than hiding involvement in the crime (i.e. having an affair). Results showed that the two fifth amendment conditions found the defendant to be more likely guilty than the control condition. Also, a factor analysis suggested that an honest and a relaxed dimension best described the defendant's character. In addition, it was discovered that perceptions of the defendant's honesty mediated the effects of perceived likelihood of guilt. / Department of Psychological Science

This thesis describes research about potential jurors' beliefs about children as witnesses. Jurors' knowledge of memory, suggestibility and child sexual abuse was collected and analysed. The aim was to identify strengths or weaknesses in jurors' knowledge to further inform discussion on whether experts should provide evidence to jurors about children's memory, suggestibility and behaviour, in cases which involve child witnesses. This research showed that jurors from both Australia and America had correct beliefs about some characteristics of child witnesses, however they also had incorrect beliefs. The main areas where both Australian and American jurors' beliefs were incorrect was in the suggestibility and interrogation category, and the memory and ability to testify category; however both had some incorrect beliefs with respect to reactions to sexual abuse and disclosure about sexual abuse categories. These findings support the proposition that expert evidence would be beneficial in improving jurors' knowledge of child witnesses, particularly in the areas of children's suggestibility and responses to interrogation. Jurors' assessment of children's testimony is fundamental in some criminal cases, and therefore information obtained in this study has implications for any case where a child witness testifies.