The Effect of Heuristic Cues on Jurors’ Systematic Information Processing in Rape Trials

There is concern that jurors’ decisions in rape trials might be influenced by misleading cues (e.g., victim stereotypes) potentially explaining disproportionately low conviction rates. We investigated the bias hypothesis from the heuristic–systematic model as an explanation for how jurors may be influenced by misleading stereotypes even while they are effortfully processing rape trial evidence. We expected that when case evidence was ambiguous, stereotypes would guide motivated participants’ effortful information processing, but not when case evidence was strong. Mock jurors ( N = 901) were asked to make decisions about a rape trial with either ambiguous or strong evidence in which the complainant was either stereotypically distressed or unemotional giving evidence. Participants were either placed under high motivation conditions to encourage effortful information processing or in a control condition with low motivation instructions to encourage less effortful processing as a comparison. Participants’ information processing and case decisions were measured as key dependent variables. We found partial support for the hypothesized interaction and the bias hypothesis, suggesting that the types of evidence participants attended to in decision-making were influenced by misleading stereotypical cues. Our findings have implications for interventions to reduce the effect of misleading stereotypes on decisions in rape trials. Additional online materials for this article are available on PWQ's website at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/03616843221118018 .

Intoxicated But Not Incapacitated: Are There Effective Methods to Assist Juries in Interpreting Evidence of Voluntary Complainant Intoxication in Cases of Rape?

Jurors often negatively evaluate complainants making allegations of rape when those complainants were intoxicated at the time of the assault. It is, therefore, essential that legal practitioners have effective methods of ensuring that jurors use evidence of intoxication for the legally permissible purpose, which is to determine the complainant's cognitive capacity to consent. This study examines whether providing judicial instructions about how jurors should make use of complainant intoxication evidence assists jurors to use this evidence appropriately. University students (N = 212) read a case synopsis of an Australian criminal trial in which the complainant described experiencing mild or moderate levels of cognitive impairment due to alcohol consumption. Participants were then given a standard instruction about using the evidence of the complainant's intoxication or one that provided an upper decision limit for determining complainant cognitive capacity (providing inference support). As expected, presenting evidence about the complainant's alcohol-impaired cognitive state attenuated participants' negative perceptions of the complainant. The judicial instructions also assisted participants as they evaluated a moderately intoxicated complainant as less capable of consenting when participants received an instruction that supported the correct inference to draw from the evidence compared to a standard instruction. However, parallel mediation analysis showed that rape schemas mediated the relationship between perceived complainant capacity to consent and perceptions of defendant guilt. Judicial instructions that support perceivers' inferences may assist participants to more appropriately evaluate information about complainants' intoxication, however problematically, rape schemas still influenced decisions about defendant guilt.

A meta-analysis of the emotional victim effect for female adult rape complainants: Does complainant distress influence credibility?

Rape cases have a disproportionately high attrition rate and low conviction rate compared with other criminal offenses. Evaluations of a rape complainant's credibility often determine whether a case progresses through the criminal justice system. Even though emotional demeanor is not related to witness honesty or accuracy, distressed rape complainants are perceived to be more credible than complainants who present with controlled affect. To understand the extent and robustness of the influence of emotional demeanor on credibility judgments of female adult rape complainants, we conducted a systematic review, meta-analysis, and p-curve analysis of the experimental simulated decision-making literature on the influence of complainant emotional demeanor on complainant credibility. The meta-analysis included 20 studies with participants who were criminal justice professionals (e.g., police officers and judges), community members, and mock jurors (N = 3128). Results suggest that distressed demeanor significantly increased perceptions of complainant credibility, with a small to moderate effect size estimate. Importantly, the results of p-curve analysis suggest that reporting bias is not a likely explanation for the effect of emotional demeanor on rape complainant credibility. Sample type (whether perceivers were criminal justice professionals or prospective jurors) and stimulus modality (whether perceivers read about or watched the complainant recount the alleged rape) were not found to moderate the effect size estimate. These results suggest that effective methods of reducing reliance on emotional demeanor to make credibility judgments about rape complainants should be investigated to make credibility assessments fairer and more accurate. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).