Cited by 95Face Recognition and PerceptionDeception detection and forensic psychologyJury Decision Making Processes

Can we reduce facial biases? Persistent effects of facial trustworthiness on sentencing decisions

Open access
Jaeger, Bastian, Todorov, Alexander T., Evans, Anthony M., van Beest, Ilja·2020·Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Abstract

Trait impressions from faces influence many consequential decisions even in situations in which decisions should not be based on a person's appearance. Here, we test (a) whether people rely on trait impressions when making legal sentencing decisions and (b) whether two types of interventions—educating decision-makers and changing the accessibility of facial information—reduce the influence of facial stereotypes. We first introduced a novel legal decision-making paradigm. Results of a pretest (n = 320) showed that defendants with an untrustworthy (vs. trustworthy) facial appearance were found guilty more often. We then tested the effectiveness of different interventions in reducing the influence of facial stereotypes. Educating participants about the biasing effects of facial stereotypes reduced explicit beliefs that personality is reflected in facial features, but did not reduce the influence of facial stereotypes on verdicts (Study 1, n = 979). In Study 2 (n = 975), we presented information sequentially to disrupt the intuitive accessibility of trait impressions. Participants indicated an initial verdict based on case-relevant information and a final verdict based on all information (including facial photographs). The majority of initial sentences were not revised and therefore unbiased. However, most revised sentences were in line with facial stereotypes (e.g., a guilty verdict for an untrustworthy-looking defendant). On average, this actually increased facial bias in verdicts. Together, our findings highlight the persistent influence of trait impressions from faces on legal sentencing decisions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jesp.2020.104004

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Informing people about the existence of biases in facial perception does not lead to a reduction in biased choices.

    “Recent research suggests that even informing people about the existence of such biases in facial perception does not lead to a reduction in biased choices (Jaeger, Todorov, Evans, & van Beest, 2020).”

    From The Consequences of Participating in the Sharing Economy: A Transparency-Based Sharing Framework (2021) · cites this paper as Jaeger, Todorov, Evans, & van Beest, 2020

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jaeger, B., Todorov, A. T., Evans, A. M., & van Beest, I.
Affiliations
  • Tilburg University (NL)
  • Princeton University (US)
Corresponding author
Jaeger, Bastian
Venue
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-09
Volume
90
Pages
104004
ISSN
0022-1031 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2991021403
Cited by
95
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 6
FWCI
6.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research portal (Tilburg University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
  • Social Sciences › Law › Jury Decision Making Processes
Keywords
facial trustworthiness, sentencing decisions, legal decision-making, facial appearance, bias reduction interventions

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review