Stereotypes influence the processing of information, introduce prejudice into the legal system and form impressions of defendants in criminal cases; which may contradict a fair trial (MacLin & Herrera, 2006). They are perceptual representations that are perceived for members of a group and include the evaluation of that particular group e.g. their behavior and attributes (MacLin & Herrera, 2006). Recognising stereotypes and understanding how they create bias, has significant effects in the criminal justice system. It is desired to maximize the amount of correct decisions jurors render, For this reason, stereotyping is important to study in a jury setting. It is also imperative to study defendant gender and crime type, as a relationship between the two may influence jurors’ verdict decisions. Gordon, Bindrim, McNicholas and Walden (1988) conducted a study to determine the effect of defendant race and type of crime on juror verdicts. The independent variable was the type of crime (burglary or embezzlement) and defendant race (black or white), while the dependent variable was the recommended jail sentence. Crime descriptions that varied in crime type and defendant race where given to an equal number of black and white students to assess. Based on this, participants determined the defendant’s jail sentence and bail amount. The severity of the crime and the probability of the defendant repeating the crime were also scaled. The studies hypothesis was supported as the white embezzler received longer jail sentences in comparison to the black embezzler and the black burglar received longer jail sentence than the white burglar Gordon et al (1988). A strength in this study was having written case scenarios where variables were easily controlled. Controlling variables increases precision and decreases inaccuracies that can negatively impact overall results. A possible limitation may be the use of a small sample size. Smaller sample sizes limit the scope to which generalisations are concluded. McCoy and Gray (2007) investigated whether the effect of defendant gender and relationship to victim impacted on juror decisions in a child sexual abuse case. The independent variables were the defendant gender (male or female) and the relationship to the victim (parent of stranger), whereas; the main dependent variable was the verdict of guilty or not. Participants were given one of four fictional cases to read whereby each case varied in terms of the relationship to the victim and the gender of the defendant (McCoy & Gray, 2007). Participants than completed several measures. Results demonstrated that male defendants were more likely to be guilty opposed to a female in an alleged child sexual abuse. This supported their hypothesis. They suggested that sexual abuse allegations against the father would result in more guilty verdicts than allegations made against a mother or stranger. It is possible that results reflect the idea that stereotypes of male defendants match the crime used in the study. A large sample size was a strength in the study. A larger sample size increases precision and is more representative of a population. The use of individual juror to render a verdict was a limitation in the study. Having juror deliberations could counteract the bias formed by an individual juror resulting in more unbiased verdict. To establish whether results from McCoy and Gray’s (2007) study was due to the male defendant being perceived as guilty and in Gordon et al (1988) study, whether the combination of social category and crime type matters; you can conduct a study where the crime type and gender varied. If there was a match between the two then females matched with stereotypical female crime will result with more guilty verdicts, however if there were no match than males would be presumed guiltier. Crime cases that varied in defendant gender (male or female) and crime type (assault or shoplifting) were given to participants to assess. They were required to then decide whether they found the defendant guilty or not. The current study aimed to investigate whether the match between the defendant gender and crime type, influences the likelihood of guilty verdict scores. If the match between the gender and the crime type matters, it is anticipated that the defendant will be guilty when described as female compared to male and charged with shoplifting. The opposite is expected to occur when the defendant was charged with assault.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of the present study was to determine investigate whether the match between the defendant gender and crime type, influences the likelihood of guilty verdict scores. It was hypothesized that if the match between the gender and the crime type mattered then the female defendant will be guilty and charged with shoplifting and the male defendant would be guilty and charged with assault. Contrary to hypothesis, the match between gender and crime type did not matter thus the defendant gender and crime type did not influence guilty verdict scores. Results demonstrate that participants were able to identify the gender of the male and female defendant, 95.85% and 82.98% respectively. Similarly participants were able to identity the type of crime for both the male (99.05%) and female (99.43%) cases. Notably, prior research has demonstrated that males were likely to be more conceited, aggressive and strong; whilst sensitivity and delicacy were commonly associated with females (Prentice & Carranza, 2002). This could be why participants stereotypically linked assault, being a more violent orientated crime with the male defendant and opposed to shoplifting Moreover, the male defendant was not only perceived guilty for the male orientated crime (assault) but also for the female-oriented crime (shoplifting) . In like manner, the female was proportionately perceived guilty as the male defendant in both crime types. Contrary to Bodenhausen and Wyer (1985) study which concluded that that stereotypes are heuristics, participants did not use stereotypes as mental shortcuts to determine the defendant’s guilt but rather used significant evidence about the crime. Results were not consistent with previous findings by McCoy and Gray (2007) and Gordon et al (1988) as defendants were presumed equally guilty for the alleged crime regardless of the defendant’s gender and neither defendant was perceived more guilty over another when associated to their stereotypical gender orientated crime. It is likely that participants did not fully grasp the intent of crime scenario and might not have known that stereotyping as an element of the study. Thus participants possibly did not draw on the use of stereotypes.Stereotypes influence the processing of information, introduce prejudice into the legal system and form impressions of defendants in criminal cases; which may contradict a fair trial (MacLin & Herrera, 2006). They are perceptual representations that are perceived for members of a group and include the evaluation of that particular group e.g. their behavior and attributes (MacLin & Herrera, 2006). Recognising stereotypes and understanding how they create bias, has significant effects in the criminal justice system. It is desired to maximize the amount of correct decisions jurors render, For this reason, stereotyping is important to study in a jury setting. It is also imperative to study defendant gender and crime type, as a relationship between the two may influence jurors’ verdict decisions. Gordon, Bindrim, McNicholas and Walden (1988) conducted a study to determine the effect of defendant race and type of crime on juror verdicts. The independent variable was the type of crime (burglary or embezzlement) and defendant race (black or white), while the dependent variable was the recommended jail sentence. Crime descriptions that varied in crime type and defendant race where given to an equal number of black and white students to assess. Based on this, participants determined the defendant’s jail sentence and bail amount. The severity of the crime and the probability of the defendant repeating the crime were also scaled. The studies hypothesis was supported as the white embezzler received longer jail sentences in comparison to the black embezzler and the black burglar received longer jail sentence than the white burglar Gordon et al (1988). A strength in this study was having written case scenarios where variables were easily controlled. Controlling variables increases precision and decreases inaccuracies that can negatively impact overall results. A possible limitation may be the use of a small sample size. Smaller sample sizes limit the scope to which generalisations are concluded. McCoy and Gray (2007) investigated whether the effect of defendant gender and relationship to victim impacted on juror decisions in a child sexual abuse case. The independent variables were the defendant gender (male or female) and the relationship to the victim (parent of stranger), whereas; the main dependent variable was the verdict of guilty or not. Participants were given one of four fictional cases to read whereby each case varied in terms of the relationship to the victim and the gender of the defendant (McCoy & Gray, 2007). Participants than completed several measures. Results demonstrated that male defendants were more likely to be guilty opposed to a female in an alleged child sexual abuse. This supported their hypothesis. They suggested that sexual abuse allegations against the father would result in more guilty verdicts than allegations made against a mother or stranger. It is possible that results reflect the idea that stereotypes of male defendants match the crime used in the study. A large sample size was a strength in the study. A larger sample size increases precision and is more representative of a population. The use of individual juror to render a verdict was a limitation in the study. Having juror deliberations could counteract the bias formed by an individual juror resulting in more unbiased verdict. To establish whether results from McCoy and Gray’s (2007) study was due to the male defendant being perceived as guilty and in Gordon et al (1988) study, whether the combination of social category and crime type matters; you can conduct a study where the crime type and gender varied. If there was a match between the two then females matched with stereotypical female crime will result with more guilty verdicts, however if there were no match than males would be presumed guiltier. Crime cases that varied in defendant gender (male or female) and crime type (assault or shoplifting) were given to participants to assess. They were required to then decide whether they found the defendant guilty or not. The current study aimed to investigate whether the match between the defendant gender and crime type, influences the likelihood of guilty verdict scores. If the match between the gender and the crime type matters, it is anticipated that the defendant will be guilty when described as female compared to male and charged with shoplifting. The opposite is expected to occur when the defendant was charged with assault.
DISCUSSION
The purpose of the present study was to determine investigate whether the match between the defendant gender and crime type, influences the likelihood of guilty verdict scores. It was hypothesized that if the match between the gender and the crime type mattered then the female defendant will be guilty and charged with shoplifting and the male defendant would be guilty and charged with assault. Contrary to hypothesis, the match between gender and crime type did not matter thus the defendant gender and crime type did not influence guilty verdict scores. Results demonstrate that participants were able to identify the gender of the male and female defendant, 95.85% and 82.98% respectively. Similarly participants were able to identity the type of crime for both the male (99.05%) and female (99.43%) cases. Notably, prior research has demonstrated that males were likely to be more conceited, aggressive and strong; whilst sensitivity and delicacy were commonly associated with females (Prentice & Carranza, 2002). This could be why participants stereotypically linked assault, being a more violent orientated crime with the male defendant and opposed to shoplifting Moreover, the male defendant was not only perceived guilty for the male orientated crime (assault) but also for the female-oriented crime (shoplifting) . In like manner, the female was proportionately perceived guilty as the male defendant in both crime types. Contrary to Bodenhausen and Wyer (1985) study which concluded that that stereotypes are heuristics, participants did not use stereotypes as mental shortcuts to determine the defendant’s guilt but rather used significant evidence about the crime. Results were not consistent with previous findings by McCoy and Gray (2007) and Gordon et al (1988) as defendants were presumed equally guilty for the alleged crime regardless of the defendant’s gender and neither defendant was perceived more guilty over another when associated to their stereotypical gender orientated crime. It is likely that participants did not fully grasp the intent of crime scenario and might not have known that stereotyping as an element of the study. Thus participants possibly did not draw on the use of stereotypes. Having a written crime scenario was viewed as a limitation in the current study. Reading would have made the study monotonous for participants and focus likely would not have been maintained. Ethically manipulating variables was a strength in this study. Normally, issues with the experimental methodology rise from ethical concerns, however the study carried out manipulation of variables whereby no unethical extremes were taken in order to obtain data. For example turning an individual into a criminal for research purposes.
CONCULSION
It is indicative that the match between the defendant gender and crime type did not matter, as the match did not influence the likelihood of guilty verdict sores. Future studies may include the use of a stimulus e.g. audio. This would make the study more Having a written crime scenario was viewed as a limitation in the current study. Reading would have made the study monotonous for participants and focus likely would not have been maintained. Ethically manipulating variables was a strength in this study. Normally, issues with the experimental methodology rise from ethical concerns, however the study carried out manipulation of variables whereby no unethical extremes were taken in order to obtain data. For example turning an individual into a criminal for research purposes.
CONCULSION
It is indicative that the match between the defendant gender and crime type did not matter, as the match did not influence the likelihood of guilty verdict sores. Future studies may include the use of a stimulus e.g. audio. This would make the study more