Common wisdom seems to suggest that racial bias, defined as disparate treatment of minority defendants, exists in jury decision-making, with Black defendants being treated more harshly by jurors than White defendants. The empirical research, however, is inconsistent--some studies show racial bias while others do not. Two previous meta-analyses have found conflicting results regarding the existence of racial bias in juror decision-making (Mazzella & Feingold, 1994, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1315-1344; Sweeney & Haney, 1992, Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 10, 179-195). This research takes a meta-analytic approach to further investigate the inconsistencies within the empirical literature on racial bias in juror decision-making by defining racial bias as disparate treatment of racial out-groups (rather than focusing upon the minority group alone). Our results suggest that a small, yet significant, effect of racial bias in decision-making is present across studies, but that the effect becomes more pronounced when certain moderators are considered. The state of the research will be discussed in light of these findings.

Concern that lineup administrators can influence eyewitness identifications has led researchers to suggest implementing double-blind testing, an idea that police resist. Using a typical eyewitness paradigm (video event followed by photographic identification test), the present study demonstrated that an alternative technique, minimizing the level of contact between lineup administrators and witnesses, could reduce false identifications without reducing hits. Specifically, witnesses were more likely to make decisions consistent with lineup administrator expectations when the level of contact between the administrator and the witness was high than when it was low. These results are explained within the experimenter expectancy framework. Implications for applied settings are discussed.

This study explored carryover effects from show-ups to subsequent line-up identifications using a novel paradigm in which participants rendered multiple identification judgements. A total of 160 participants studied a series of faces and subsequently viewed a series of target-absent and target-present show-ups. Following a retention interval, participants then made identification judgements from a series of target-absent and target-present line-ups. Remember-Know-Guess judgements were collected to assess the phenomenological basis of carryover effects in face identification. Our results indicated clear carryover effects from show-ups to line-ups, such that repeated exposure to a face increased the likelihood that it would later be identified, regardless of whether or not it had been presented at the time of study. The phenomenological basis for these carryover effects is discussed, as are the implications of these findings for police conduct of multiple eyewitness identification procedures.

No abstract