The influence of defendant race and victim physical attractiveness on juror decision-making in a sexual assault trial
Abstract
Previous research has examined separately the influence of defendant race and victim physical attractiveness on juror decision-making in sexual assault trials. The current study sought to examine the combined effects of defendant race and victim physical attractiveness in a trial of alleged acquaintance sexual assault. Mock jurors read a trial transcript in which the defendant race and victim physical attractiveness were manipulated via photographs. Results demonstrated that women were not influenced by victim attractiveness, but that men were more certain of the defendant guilt when the victim was unattractive. Defendant race and victim attractiveness interacted with regards to victim responsibility ratings – when the defendant was White, attractive victims were rated as more responsible for the alleged assault than unattractive victims; this effect was reversed for trials with a Black defendant and nonexistent for trials with an Aboriginal Canadian defendant.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Jurors have biases that impact their judgments and decisions, from the race of the defendant to the victim's attractiveness.
“When it comes to jurors, for example, there are plenty of biases that impact their judgments and decisions, from the race of the defendant to the victim’s attractiveness (Maeder et al., 2015).”
From Biased and biasing: the hidden bias cascade and bias snowball effects (2025) · cites this paper as Maeder et al., 2015
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 45 · Cited by 52
- Authors
- Maeder, E. M., Yamamoto, S., & Saliba, P.
- Affiliations
- Carleton University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Maeder, Evelyn M.
- Venue
- Psychology, Crime & Law
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2014-05-21
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 62-79
- ISSN
- 1068-316X (ISSN-L)
- 1477-2744
- OpenAlex
- W2002287752
- Cited by
- 52
- References
- 45
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 35.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychology Crime and Law (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Jury Decision Making Processes
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
- Social Sciences › Law › Legal processes and jurisprudence
- Keywords
- defendant race, jury decision-making, sexual assault trials, mock jurors, victim responsibility, gender differences, racial bias, Black defendants
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
