Effects of Physical Attractiveness, Sex, and Type of Crime on Mock Juror Decisions

A study previously conducted with American college students was replicated with Chinese college students. The Chinese subjects read a description of either a burglary or a swindle where the defendant was either male or female, physically attractive or unattractive, and Chinese or American. A biographical sketch and a photograph of the defendant were attached to the description of the crime. Subjects were asked to indicate the length of sentence appropriate for the crime, rate the seriousness of the crime, and rate the defendant on 12 personal characteristics. Results indicated that (a) female subjects gave longer sentences for the crime of burglary but only when the defendant was American; (b) attractiveness was associated with lenient sentencing for American burglars but with stringent sentencing for American swindlers; (c) Chinese women gave more lenient sentences to female defendants than to male defendants; (d) American defendants, regardless of the crime, were rated more than favorably than Chinese defendants; (e) attractive defendants were rated more favorably on 6 of the 12 personal characteristics; and (f) the swindler was rated more favorably than the burglar on 7 of the 12 personal characteristics.

Natural Observations of the Links between Attractiveness and Initial Legal Judgments

Employing natural observations, female and male courtroom judges set the fines or bail amounts in misdemeanor and felony cases for 915 female and 1,320 male defendants. These persons varied widely in attractiveness and were unable to alter their appearance before presentation to their judges. Police officers, acting as confederates, rated the defendants' attractiveness levels. These levels were compared with bails and fines set by the judges. Defendant attractiveness levels were important only in bail and fine amounts for misdemeanor charges, not for felonies. Implications of the results for additional inquiry in ecologically justifiable litigation settings are presented.

Experimental Research on Jury Decision-Making

Because trial juries deliberate in secrecy, legal debates about jury functioning have relied heavily on anecdote and speculation. In recent years, investigators have begun to challenge many common assumptions about jury behavior. An important tool in this effort has been the mock jury experiment, in which research participants are randomly assigned to alternative trial conditions and asked to reach a verdict in a simulated case. Researchers have used mock jury experiments to test hypotheses about causal influences on jury behavior and to develop theoretical models of the jury deliberation process.